LOCAL CONTENT MANAGEMENT IN KENYA METHODIST ...

LOCAL CONTENT MANAGEMENT IN KENYA METHODIST

UNIVERSITY (KeMU)

BY

KAMAU, VICTOR GITAU

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Information Sciences in Partial Fulfillment of

the Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Master of Science in Library and

Information Studies in the Department of Library, Records Management and

Information Studies

MOI UNIVERSITY

ELDORET

OCTOBER, 2014

ii

DECLARATION

DECLARATION BY CANDIDATE

This thesis is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other

University. No part of this thesis may be reproduced without the prior written permission

of the author and/or Moi University.

Signature: …………………………………….……. Date: ……….……………….

Victor Gitau Kamau

IS/MPHIL/040/08

DECLARATION BY SUPERVISORS

This thesis has been submitted for examination with our approval as University

Supervisors.

Signature: …………………………………….……. Date: ……….……………….

Prof. Joseph Kiplang‘at

Department of Library, Records Management and Information Studies,

School of Information Sciences,

Moi University.

Signature: …………………………………….……. Date: ……….……………….

Prof. Cephas Odini

Department of Library, Records Management and Information Studies,

School of Information Sciences,

Moi University.

iii

DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my dear wife, Eliza Wambui, and my lovely sons, Kelvin Kamau

and Joel Ndichu. You are the greatest gifts I have. Thank you for your support and

constant encouragement during my study.

iv

ABSTRACT

Local content is the expression of locally-owned and adapted knowledge of a community.

Local content management is important in increasing access to institutions‘ research

output, promotion of creativity and innovativeness of the members and it improves

institution‘s online visibility. The situation at KeMU is such that one cannot easily tell

the types of local content available. This is because there lacks policy and procedures for

its identification, capturing, processing and dissemination. The aim of this study was to

investigate the management of local content and develop an effective and efficient local

content management framework for KeMU. The study was guided by the following

objectives: to establish the types of local content at KeMU; to find out how it is captured,

processed, and disseminated; to investigate how library patrons access, retrieve and use

local content; to establish the challenges; and to develop a framework for effective and

efficient management of local content at KeMU. Two models informed the study; Local

Content vs. Global Content Expression and Application Grid and Content Landscape

Model. The study applied both qualitative and quantitative methods. The sample was

drawn from deans/heads of programmes, librarians, students and lecturers. The Deputy

Vice-Chancellor, Academic Affairs, the University Librarian and Information

Communication Technology (ICT) Director were included as key informants.

Questionnaires and interviews were used as data collection tools. Data was analyzed

using both qualitative and quantitative techniques. The study showed that there existed

several types of local content but there were no agreed upon procedures for collection,

processing and dissemination of the available local content. Lack of a policy on local

content management led to selective and non-structured management of local content.

The study concluded that local content at KeMU was not effectively and efficiently

collected, processed, disseminated and used. The major challenge was lack of an

institutional local content policy. The study recommended development of a local content

policy that guides on definition, management, staffing and funding of local content

management in KeMU. A framework for effective and efficient management of local

content at KeMU has been developed and proposed by the study.

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ................................................................................................................ II

DEDICATION ...................................................................................................................III

ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... IV

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... V

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... VIII

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... IX

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................................. X

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................... XI

CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION .......................................1

1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1

1.1.1 Local Content ........................................................................................................1

1.1.2 Local Content Management ..................................................................................2

1.2 Background To The Study .............................................................................................5

1.2.1 Kenya Methodist University .................................................................................6

1.2.2 Kenya Methodist University Library ....................................................................6

1.3 Statement of the Problem ..............................................................................................9

1.4 Aim of the Study .........................................................................................................10

1.5 Objectives of the Study ...............................................................................................11

1.6 Research Questions .....................................................................................................11

1.7 Assumptions of the Study ...........................................................................................12

1.8 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................12

1.9 Scope of the Study ......................................................................................................13

1.10 Limitations of the Study.............................................................................................13

1.11 Definition of Terms....................................................................................................13

CHAPTER TWO .............................................................................................................16

LITERATURE REVIEW ...............................................................................................16

2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................16

2.2 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................17

2.2.1 Global vs. Local Content Expression and Application Grid ...............................18

2.2.2 Conway Content Landscape Model ....................................................................21

2.2.3 Applicability of the models to the study .............................................................25

2.3 Local Content ...............................................................................................................29

2.3.1 Benefits Of Local Content ..................................................................................32

2.4 Local Content Management .........................................................................................34

2.4.1 Local Content Creation/Collection .....................................................................36

2.4.2 Marketing ............................................................................................................40

2.5 Access, Retrieval and Use of Local Content ..............................................................41

2.6 Role of Librarian in Managing Local Content ............................................................44

2.7 Challenges of Local Content Management .................................................................46

2.8 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................47

vi

CHAPTER THREE .........................................................................................................49

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................49

3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................49

3.2 Research Design...........................................................................................................49

3.3 Study Population ..........................................................................................................51

3.4 Population Sampling ....................................................................................................52

3.5 Data Collection Methods .............................................................................................59

3.5.1 Questionnaires.....................................................................................................60

3.5.2 Interviews ...........................................................................................................61

3.6 Procedure For Data Collection .....................................................................................62

3.7 Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................63

3.8 Ethical Considerations .................................................................................................64

3.9 Chapter Summary ........................................................................................................64

CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................66

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION ..........................66

4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................66

4.2 Response Rate ..............................................................................................................66

4.3 Characteristics Of Respondents ...................................................................................67

4.3.1 Academic Level Of Students ..............................................................................67

4.3.2 Qualifications Of Lecturers, Librarians And Deans/Heads Of Programmes ......69

4.3.3 Duration Of Respondents In Kemu.....................................................................70

4.3.4 Mode Of Study Of Students ................................................................................73

4.3.5 Work Lecturers Were Involved In ......................................................................75

4.4 Types Of Local Content ...............................................................................................76

4.4.1 Collaboration With Other Organizations ............................................................79

4.4.2 Local Content In Teaching Departments ............................................................79

4.4.3 Local Content Vs. External Content ...................................................................81

4.5 Capturing, Processing And Dissemination Of Local Content .....................................83

4.5.1 Identification Of Local Content ..........................................................................83

4.5.2 Processing Of Local Content ..............................................................................86

4.5.3 Dissemination Of Local Content ........................................................................89

4.6 Access, Retrieval And Use Of Local Content .............................................................90

4.6.1 Awareness Of Local Content Among Lecturers And Students At Kemu ..........91

4.6.2 Access And Utilization Of Local Content ..........................................................93

4.6.3 Local Content Retrieval ......................................................................................96

4.6.4 Importance Of Local Content .............................................................................97

4.7 Challenges Experienced In Local Content Management .............................................99

4.7.1 Policy Related Challenges ..................................................................................99

4.7.2 Technical Related Challenges ...........................................................................101

4.7.3 Social Related Challenges .................................................................................102

4.8 Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................103 CHAPTER FIVE ....................................................................................................................... 104

SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ... 104

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................104

5.2 Summary Of Major Findings .....................................................................................104

5.2.1 Types Of Local Content At Kemu ..............................................................105

vii

5.2.2 Collection, Processing And Dissemination Of Local Content....................108

5.2.3 Access, Retrieval And Use Of Local Content ............................................114

5.2.4 Local Content Management Challenges .....................................................115

5.3 Conclusion .................................................................................................................119

5.4 Recommendations ......................................................................................................121

5.4.1 Develop Local Content Policy .......................................................................121

5.4.2 Definition Of Local Content ..........................................................................122

5.4.3 Determine The Procedures .............................................................................122

5.4.4 Incentives Provision .......................................................................................123

5.4.5 Responsibilities Of Departments ...................................................................124

5.4.6 Funding And Staffing ....................................................................................124

5.4.7 Training Of Users ..........................................................................................125

5.4.8 Awareness Creation .......................................................................................126

5.4.9 Proposed Framework .....................................................................................127

5.4.9.1 Creation/Collection .............................................................................129

5.4.9.2 Management ........................................................................................130

5.4.9.3 Use/Access ..........................................................................................130

5.4.9.4 The Environment .................................................................................131

5.4.10 Suggestion For Further Studies ......................................................................131

REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................132

APPENDICES ................................................................................................................136

Appendix A: Questionnaire For Students ........................................................................136

Appendix B: Interview Schedule For Lecturers ..............................................................143

Appendix C: Interview Schedule For Collection Development Librarian ......................146

Appendix D: Interview Schedule For Electronic Services Librarian ..............................148

Appendix E: Interview Schedule For Deans/Head of Programmes.................................150

Appendix F: Interview Schedule For University Librarian .............................................153

Appendix G: Interview Schedule For ICT Director ........................................................155

Appendix H: Interview Schedule For DSVC - Academic Affairs ...................................157

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Composition of Study Population .....................................................................51

Table 3.2: Composition of Sample ....................................................................................59

Table 4.1: Qualification of Lecturers, Librarians and Deans/Heads of Prgrammes ..........69

Table 4.2: Work of Lecturers in Kemu (N=26, Multiple Responses) ...............................75

Table 4.3: Types of Local Content and Their Popularity ..................................................76

Table 4.4: Local Content Identification .............................................................................84

Table 4.5: Local Content Processing .................................................................................86

Table 4.6: Local Content Dissemination ...........................................................................89

Table 4.7: Local Content Awareness .................................................................................91

Table 4.8: Sources of Local Content ..................................................................................96

Table 4.9: Importance of Local Content (N=293) .............................................................98

ix

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Local Content vs Global Content Expression and Quadrants .........................19

Figure 2.2: The Conway Content Landscape Model .........................................................22

Figure 2.3: The Extended Conway Content Landscape Model .........................................24

Figure 2.4: Triangulated Content Landscape Model Showing The Local Content Half and

Foreign Content Half .........................................................................................................28

Figure 4.1: Response Rate of Respondents........................................................................66

Figure 4.2: Academic Level of Students (N=293) .............................................................68

Figure 4.3: Duration Of Students in Kemu (N=293) .........................................................70

Figure 4.4: Duration of Lecturers, Librarians and Deans/Programme Heads at Kemu .....72

Figure 4.5: Mode of Study ................................................................................................74

Figure 4.6: Composition of Kemu Publications ................................................................78

Figure 4.7: Local Content vs External Content .................................................................81

Figure 4.8: Access and Use of Local Content by Students in Different Modes of Study.94

Figure 5.1: The Proposed Local Content Management Framework for Kemu ...............128

x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I wish to acknowledge Kenya Methodist University (KeMU) for sponsoring my study. I

further acknowledge my supervisors, Prof. Kiplangat and Prof. Odini for academic

assistance I received from them. I also give my heartfelt thanks to Mrs. Kaberia and my

colleagues at KeMU for their support during the period of the study. I take full

responsibility for errors, omissions and interpretation of findings within this study.

May God bless you all.

xi

ABBREVIATIONS

AMREF: African Medical and Research Foundation

BBC: British Broadcasting Corporation

CD-ROMs: Compact Disc – Read Only Memory

CNN: Cable News Network

DFID: Department for International Development

DVC: Deputy Vice Chancellor

DVC-AA: Deputy Vice Chancellor – Academic Affairs

ICTs: Information Communication Technologies

IICD: Institute for International Cooperation and Development

IJPP: International Journal of Professional Practice

INASP: International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publications

IRs: Institutional Repositories

KeMU: Kenya Methodist University

KeMUSO: Kenya Methodist University Students Organization

KLISC: Kenya Library and Information Services Consortium

KNH: Kenyatta National Hospital

LC: Local Content

ODLM: Open and Distance Learning Mode

OPAC: Online Public Access Catalogue

PERI: Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information

UL: University Librarian

UNESCO: United Nations Educational Scientific and cultural Organization

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Introduction

This chapter provides the background of the research outlining the broad field of study.

The aim is to inform the reader by laying the foundations for the study. It includes a

description of the research problem, its aim as well as objectives and justification for the

study.

1.1.1 Local Content

Local content is the expression of locally-owned and adapted knowledge of a community

Ballantyne (2002); where a community is defined by its location, language, or area of

interest. Bruegge, C. et al (2011) in giving recognition to local content notes;

―The content that is most important to people is typically in their own

language and is relevant to the communities in which they live and

work. These communities may be defined by their location, culture,

language, religion, ethnicity or area of interest and individuals may

belong to many communities at the same time. Further, communities

evolve so what is relevant will change over time. This relevant content

is often referred to as ―local content‖. The term community is used in a

broad way to include not only local professional communities (public

and private), but also non-professional content creators and users‖ (p.

4).

The lack of local content is evident across all media and information channels. One needs

to spend just a few minutes in front of a television or computer screen to notice the

overwhelming presence of content coming from content providers in the developed

2

countries, reflecting language, values and lifestyles which are different from those of the

community ―consuming‖ the content (Unesco, 2013). This is made more evident by the

resources subscribed by Kenya Library and Information Services Consortium (KLISC).

Among all information resources subscribed to by KLSIC, none is locally published

(KLISC, 2013).

This study took a university as a community and therefore considered local content in a

university setting to be the expression of any knowledge owned and adapted by the

university community members where university community included lecturers, non-

teaching staff, researchers, administrators, students and various groups, societies,

associations and clubs of members of the university community. When this locally-

owned knowledge is stored, managed and disseminated via electronic means, it becomes

local e-content.

1.1.2 Local Content Management

Local content being the expression of locally-owned and adapted knowledge qualifies to

be a source of information and thus needs to be managed. Local content has been

managed by research and academic institutions through the application of institutional

repositories. According to Lynch (2003), institutional repository is a set of services that a

university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination

of digital materials created by the institution and its community members. Genoni (2004)

quoting Johnson (2002) shows the main attributes of an institutional repository as:-

3

Institutionally defined;

Scholarly;

Cumulative and perpetual; and

Open and interoperable.

These can be compared with those of the local content, locally-owned or adapted by the

community members.

Genoni (2004) observed that institutional repositories are designed to meet the needs and

interests of the institutions that develop them, thus their content should be developed with

the local requirements foremost. Lynch (2003) quoting Allard, Mack and Reichert (2005)

agrees and gives three content types that should be included:-

(a) Intellectual life of the institution,

(c) Experimental and observational data, and

(c) Traditional intellectual works.

The content, however, is not restricted to that produced within the institution. Genoni

(2004) notes that there have been suggestions that the selection of content for institutional

repositories needs to be regulated in some way but none of the suggestions have been

widely accepted giving lee way for institutions to include content whether locally-

produced or not, formal scholarly communication or informal scholarly communication.

The audience of institutional repositories is primarily the institution members but the

repositories are open and interoperable allowing anybody to have access to the content

indiscriminately. Institutional repositories work in an open environment where authors

4

are expected to submit their work to the repository and also expected to keep updating

(versioning) (Devakos, 2006) and they are not expected to be compensated for submitting

their work (Genoni, 2004). These submitted works are then available via the repository

software to the members of the institution for fulfilling the institution‘s mission and

administrative needs (Conway, 2008).

Local content that is considered open is therefore freely available and free from most

permission barriers. Peter Suber‘s while giving an opening keynote in 9th

International

Symposium on Electronic Theses and Dissertation Unlocking, acknowledged that open

content is both digital and online (Reeves, Hagen and Jewell, 2006). The Budapest Open

Access Initiative definition of open access agrees thus:

"free availability on the public Internet, permitting any users to read,

download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these

articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for

any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other

than those inseparable from gaining access to the Internet itself. The only

constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in

this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work

and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited." (Budapest Open Access

Initiative, 2002)

Local content being content from members of a community needs to be created,

collected, disseminated and used by the owning communities and beyond. For this to

happen, an effective and efficient local content framework needs to be developed and

applied.

5

1.2 Background to the Study

According to Atnafu (2005), local content is ―content that reflects the language, the

culture, and the real life of a locality or a country‖ (p. 3). He contests that any

information that can be localized (made linguistically and culturally appropriate to a

target locale) qualifies to be local content.

Most institutions do not have specific repositories for locally-produced content rather

they consider all content that is academic, that is, theses and dissertations, research

papers, technical papers and electronic books that the university has rights or have been

donated as content for institutional repository. The idea that a university repository

should contain content for the local community rather than from the local community is

emphasized by the Digital Content Landscape Model that presents both locally-produced

and globally-sourced content as digital assets of a university (Conway, 2008).

Tjiek (2005) notes that local e-content management provides an opportunity for

documentation of locally-produced content and gives the digital library system

(DesaInformasi) developed for Petra Christian University as an example that has been

very beneficial to various academic departments and non-academic units which had

struggled to find some kind of documentation systems for their locally-produced works or

resources.

6

1.2.1 Kenya Methodist University

In 1986, a vision to establish a university sponsored by the Methodist Church in Kenya

was announced. The following year, a working committee was formed to establish the

possibility of starting a university at Meru, Kenya. The trust deed for establishment of the

proposed university was drawn up in 1991. The following year, the draft proposal was

completed and approved by the Commission for Higher Education. In 1995, Prof.

Mutuma Mugambi was appointed a pioneer volunteer principal of the proposed

university.

The Kenya Methodist University Development Association (KEMUDA) was formally

established and a major funds drive was held to raise money to complete some ongoing

physical structures at that time. In 1997, a letter of interim authority, giving approval for

the establishment of Kenya Methodist University was granted (KeMU, 2008). In 1998, an

inauguration ceremony took place and Prof. Mutuma Mugambi was installed the

university‘s founder Vice-Chancellor. In 2005, KeMU opened several satellite centres in

Nairobi, Nakuru, Nyeri and Mombasa. On June 26th

, 2006, the institution became a

chartered university. KeMU‘s Headquarters are at Meru, Kenya and has campuses in

Meru, Nairobi, Nakuru, Nyeri and Mombasa.

1.2.2 Kenya Methodist University Library

KeMU university library is an information system with five branches. The vision of the

library is to be a dynamic, inclusive, competitive and indispensable centre of excellence

7

in teaching, learning, research and service to humanity. Its mission is to provide students,

academic staff and other users of the library with access to an extensive range of current

and relevant quality information resources in support of academic work in the university.

Its objectives are as follows:-

To support the fulfillment of the curriculum by actively participating in the

teaching and learning programmes.

To serve as a tool in assisting learning, teaching and research; thus making its role

that of a spatial pivot and intellectual symbol of the university.

KeMU library is automated and uses Koha integrated library system. This enables it to

offer faster, quality services and have well-documented reports on the available

information materials. Every library unit in various campuses uses the centralized Koha

library management system. Initially, Librarysoft management system was installed at

each of the library campus which made it hard to offer inter-library loan and to serve the

patrons who were registered in different campuses.

The library introduced digital library services in Nairobi Campus offering online services

such as electronic journals, information literacy, e-books and website creation, updating

and maintenance. Digital library is the pivot point in working with students and lecturers

in collection and enhancing use of local content such as past examination papers, copies

of student projects and theses, lecturer‘s journal articles, student organization‘s

publications and faculty journals.

8

The library acquired Koha – a web-based integrated library management system – to

replace Librarysoft which was not web-based and required installation on all library

computers in all campuses. Koha runs on a single database and allows patrons in all

campuses to be served in any of KeMU libraries, enabling wide access and use of

materials wherever the students or resources are located. This also enhanced collection

and use of local e-content by the vast number of clientele.

The librarians have identified the following as what constitutes local content at KeMU:

Past examination papers

Lecture notes

Journals published by the university

Magazines published by departments or student‘s associations

Images and pictures

Music and audio files

Poetry published or unpublished by any member of KeMU community

Video files

KeMU library has selected open-source software to help in collecting, processing and

disseminating local content. The wiki-based software used by Wikipedia has been

selected and is being used to collect, manage and disseminate past examination papers via

KeMU library website.

9

1.3 Statement of the Problem

University libraries are obligated with the duty to collect, organize, preserve and

disseminate information/knowledge within the university community and the world at

large. Thus the management of locally-expressed knowledge falls under the armpit of the

university library. The little amount of local content is evident, one has to spend some

time on the university‘s online platform and realize the overwhelming presence of foreign

content. A similar inadequacy in the generation of local content is evident in university

libraries found in developing countries.

KeMU, like other universities in Kenya, is equally affected by the inadequate experience

and expertise needed in management of local content. ICTs are yet to be fully utilized.

Instead of assisting in promoting the expression of locally-adapted knowledge, ICTs have

been used to push foreign content towards the locals and in effect diminishing visibility

and accessibility of local content.

Although there is availability of local content, its identification, capturing, processing and

dissemination is below par compared with foreign content. Information materials that

were externally sourced were easily identifiable, processed and disseminated while most

of local content types were not available for access, retrieval and use in the library. This

inaccessibility became a greater problem when ranking universities internationally where

KeMU hardly featured anywhere close to the top. This was partly due to lack of an

avenue to express its unique contribution to the fund of knowledge in a manner that was

accessible and usable by the outside world through the electronic platforms such as a

10

website. The G-factor (measure of number of links to a university's website from the

websites of other leading universities) of KeMU was low due to inaccessibility of its

local content by other universities as well as by leading research centres.

The inapplicability of research findings to local problems is as a result of information

sources, theories and concepts that inform the studies which are derived from foreign

content that is easy to access and use via electronic media. KeMU library had a website

where researchers and students could access online journals. Most of the journals were

managed by publishers in the developed countries whereas there were no links to locally-

published journals. However, no study had been conducted to assess the efficiency and

effectiveness of locally-owned and adapted knowledge.

To increase the relevance and applicability of research output, local content should be

identified, collected, organized, preserved, accessed, retrieved and used. Local content

management can improve the quality of research and also increase the importance of

KeMU in comparison with other universities. It is against this background that this study

investigates the level of management of local content at KeMU.

1.4 Aim of the Study

To investigate management of local content at KeMU and to develop an effective and

efficient local content management framework for the same.

11

1.5 Objectives of the Study

The study was guided by the following objectives:

1. To establish the types of local content created at KeMU.

2. To find out how local content is captured, processed and disseminated at

KeMU.

3. To find out how clients access, retrieve and use local content at KeMU.

4. To establish the challenges experienced in management of local content at

KeMU.

5. To make recommendations and develop a framework for managing local

content at KeMU.

1.6 Research Questions

This study sought to answer the following questions:

1. What types of local content are created at KeMU?

2. How does KeMU library identify local content?

3. What strategies are in place for collecting, processing and disseminating local

content?

4. How does KeMU library clientele access, retrieve and use local content?

5. What challenges has KeMU library experienced in the management of local

content and how can the situation be addressed?

6. How can the management of local content at KeMU be improved?

12

1.7 Assumptions of the Study

The study makes the following assumptions

1. KeMU is a community of individuals and groups of persons whose motivation

is to excel in academics and research.

2. Local content is created and used in academics in KeMU.

3. All KeMU community members are able to create and use local content.

1.8 Significance of the Study

The study sought to collect data on an area that may have been neglected by KeMU

library and left to knowledge producers – local content management. The findings of the

study are of importance as they reveal a new area of librarianship that has not been

exploited at KeMU library.

The study has a practical value as the model developed will assist in capturing,

processing, dissemination and use of local content in KeMU. This study has an intention

of providing information that could be used by policy makers in KeMU.

KeMU library staff will find the findings important in developing collection development

procedures and drawing up the local content management policy. Clients on the other

hand will benefit from the exposure of locally-generated, owned and expressed

knowledge. The study recommended the search strategies for local content at KeMU

which will enhance the users‘ search and retrieval skills.

13

1.9 Scope of the Study

This study covered five KeMU campuses across the country and sought to establish the

level of local content management. The following respondents were consulted:

KeMU students

KeMU lecturers

KeMU library staff

Deputy Vice-Chancellor, Academic Affairs (DVC-AA)

ICT Director and

University librarian.

1.10 Limitations of the Study

Open and Distance Learning Mode (ODLM) students were not available at the campuses

and thus not so many answered the questionnaire as earlier intended. The researcher gave

the questionnaires during the week preceding the exams when the ODLM students are

required to attend tutorials. The lecturers and library staff may have had inadequate

information concerning the university library collection and the information provided

through corroboration and how it was being disseminated.

1.11 Definition of Terms

Capture: This is the act of recording in a permanent file (Merriam-webster, 2013).

Capture is used in this study to refer to the processes that are involved to record local

content on a form that can be availed to users for access. This form can be either digital

or print.

14

Community: According to Gordon, M., (1998) community is a concept that concerns a

particularly constituted set of social relationships based on something which the

participants have in common—usually a common sense of identity. For the purposes of

this study, local community will be understood to mean: Kenya Methodist University

community which includes KeMU students, lecturers, non-teaching staff, partners and

development associates whose common characteristic is to advance in academic.

Content: Content is information and experiences that may provide value for an end-

user/audience in specific contexts. Content may be delivered via any medium such as the

Internet, television, and audio CDs, as well as live events such as conferences and stage

performances (Wikipedia.org, 2013).

Dissemination: This term means to disperse widely (Merriam-webster, 2013). In this

study, dissemination is used to refer to availing, sharing or dispersing of local content to

users within or without KeMU, online or offline and in digital or print form.

Local content management: According to Bruegge, C. et al (2011), there are four

steps/activities of local content development and dissemination: creation, preservation,

dissemination and utilization. For the purposes of this study, the following will be

considered as the management activities for local content management: capturing,

processing, dissemination and utilization. This is because they are broader and include

smaller information management activities within them.

15

Local content: Local content is the expression of locally-owned and adapted knowledge

of a community (Ballantyne (2002); where a community is defined by its location,

language, or area of interest. In this study, local content will be understood to be the

expression of all knowledge that has been gained, transformed, assimilated, adapted and

owned by individual or a group of individuals who comprise the KeMU community.

Management: According to Businessdictionary.com, management is the organization

and coordination of the activities of a business in order to achieve defined objectives

Businessdictionary.com (2013). The study agrees with this definition and takes into

consideration that the business to be referred to is the local content management at

KeMU and the activities refer to the identification, capture, processing, dissemination and

utilization of local content.

Processing: In this study, the term is used to refer to classification, cataloguing, and

format conversion of local content at KeMU. According to thefreedictionary.com, (2013)

processing is concerned with gathering, manipulating, storing, retrieving, and classifying

recorded information.

Utilization: This means to make use of. In this research, utilization is used in reference to

local content use by users/clients.

16

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter reviews relevant literature in local content management as presented by

various authors in the field of information science and information technology. Most of

the literature reviewed is on institutional repositories which are management systems for

content developed by and for the institution.

This chapter also reviews two theoretical frameworks/models. A triangulation of two

models approach has been applied. Global vs. Local Content Expression and Application

Model that is used to present the relevance of local content vis-à-vis the global content

revealing the various interactions between the global and local contents and their

expressions and applications. The other model is Conway Content Landscape Model that

is used to model the digital assets of a university addressing the following issues:

The broader academic mission within which digital content is created, acquired

(bought and licensed), managed and preserved, and distributed and used.

Selection processes and priority setting exercises based on the dual perspectives

of content creator/stakeholders and content user/stakeholders.

Digital content property scales that provide an analytical foundation for assigning

management priorities to particular classes of digital content.

Literature review is important in research as it enables the research get access to

knowledge contributed by other researchers and also to identify gaps that the study can

17

fill. University of Western Sydney library identifies the following importance of literature

review:

To build knowledge and identify research methodologies and seminal works in

your field.

To help focus and refine your research question by articulating the knowledge

gap.

Provide the intellectual context for your work and situate it within the field.

Ensure you will not be replicating existing knowledge or reproducing technical

errors.

Identify other researchers in your field (a researcher network is a valuable

resource).

Identify the distinctive contribution your research will make and to produce a

rationale and justification for your study.

Learn how research findings are discussed and presented in your discipline area

(University of Western Sydney library, n.d.).

This study benefited much from literature review as the adopted frameworks and model

were informed by the literature review. The proposed framework for efficient and

effective management of local content in KeMU was the result of both literature review

and study findings.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

This study is informed by two models. The first one is a model developed by

International Institute for Communication and Development (IICD) in association with

18

the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology and funded by the UK department

for International Development (DFID) as reported by Ballantyne (2002) and the other one

is by Conway (2007) – Conway Content Landscape Model.

2.2.1 Global vs. Local Content Expression and Application Grid

IICD and Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology project came up with a

simple grid comprising two axes to distinguish between the expression of content (its

generation, adaptation, etc) on the one hand and the application of content on the other.

Each has a global and local end.

The figure below shows Local content vs. Global Content Expression and Application

Grid indicating the four quadrants of local and global content expression and application,

and the movement of content from expression to application.

19

Figure 2.1: Local Content vs. Global Content Expression and Application Grid

showing the Movement of Content in the Four Quadrants

The northeast quadrant with its global content for global applications is not very

interesting from a local content perspective. It is the source of much of the content that is

said to be ‗invading‘ poor countries. More positively, it is the centre of international

information exchange efforts that draw on local content from all sources to address global

issues.

Northeast Quadrant

Southeast Quadrant

Northwest Quadrant

Southwest Quadrant

20

The southwest quadrant is where the expression of local content for local

application/consumption is most concentrated. The key challenge for actors in this

quadrant is ‗local ownership‘ of the content as well as the processes to express it. This is

where the university libraries in Kenya need to concentrate on.

The northwest quadrant is a very busy zone in which most development agencies as well

as many local organizations are most active. They seek to bring relevant and reliable

global (or external) information to local communities. One major problem is that

international 'pushers' of information often focus on the end-user, ignoring the vital role

of local intermediaries. Efforts such as provision of local access to international

information sources like journals fall in this quadrant. The key challenge for actors in this

quadrant is ‗adaptation and synthesis‘ - so that the external content is translated,

transformed, and adjusted to suit local situations. The challenge of ‗adaptation and

synthesis‘ still remains. The users are expected to synthesize and adapt all this

information into local knowledge and apply it.

The southeast quadrant represents the flow of locally expressed content towards global

audiences. This is where efforts to mobilize ‗southern voices‘ are found, as well as e-

commerce efforts of all kinds that seek to sell local arts, crafts, and music to global

audiences. Creating digital anthologies or disseminating local research results to

international audiences is also in this quadrant. Translation from local contexts and

languages is critical. This is where e-content from developing countries is expected to

make a mark and where its relative absence has led to calls for more ‗local content.‘ The

21

key challenge for actors in this quadrant is the ‗visibility‘ of the local content to external

local and global ‗consumers.‘

2.2.2 Conway Content Landscape Model

The Conway Content Landscape Model (CLM) is a multi-dimensional framework that

addresses three outstanding issues with digital asset management in universities. First, the

model acknowledges the broader academic mission within which digital content is

created, acquired (bought and licensed), managed and preserved, and distributed and

used. Second, the model provides for selection processes and priority setting exercises

based on the dual perspectives of content creator/stakeholders and content

user/stakeholders. Third, the model identifies four digital content property scales that

provide an analytical foundation for assigning management priorities to particular classes

of digital content (Conway, 2008).

This model is a static representation of content of institutional repositories in universities

and captures the management activities that are carried out on digital content in

universities such as creation, identification, acquisition, preservation and dissemination.

This model looks at how e-teaching, e-research, e-records and e-publishing relate with

the variables that describe the core digital content management challenges that

universities face: property rights, structure, source and possession.

22

The figure below shows Content Landscape Model

Figure 2.2: The Conway Content Landscape Model

Source: Conway (2007).

Figure 2.2 identifies the four challenges a university is likely to face as it manages

content. These challenges are: property rights, Structure, source and procession and are

hereby discussed.

Property rights distinguishes campus digital assets based on the likelihood that the

university can retain the rights to capture, store, preserve and make available digital

content to its academic community. In the present environment, the rights of a university

vis-à-vis digital content are not a dichotomous proposition, but rather depend on a

23

number of factors that limit options for preservation and access. Complexity is lightened

in situations where a university has unambiguous rights to manage digital content.

Structure recognizes that digital objects range from tightly structured, highly relational

database elements to loosely affiliated items assembled for varying purposes. Tight

structure improves the likelihood that valuable assets can be identified and managed

actively; dispersed and loosely affiliated objects add complexity.

The source of digital assets plays a significant role in determining management

priorities. Digital content that originates on a university campus (internal), either through

digitization or through acquisition, may be simpler to identify and more technically

capable of effective management than externally generated content. Digital content that

originates locally has the value of ―uniqueness‖ that adds distinctive character to a

university, much like a library‘s special collections have done through the past century.

Possession as a variable of the content landscape points to the diversity of campus access

models. Although some digital content of critical value to the academic mission is

secured on campus-managed servers, the university rarely possesses some of the most

significant digital resources in which the university has a continuing stake, particularly

licensed electronic journals and books. Access is most likely through links to external

data providers (journal publishers, database contractor, multimedia conglomerate) with

limited or no commitment to preservation. Possession is quite often unassociated with

property rights.

24

The figure below shows the Extended Content Landscape Model.

Figure 2.3: The extended Conway Content Landscape Model

Source: Conway (2007)

Fig. 2.3 is as a result of extension of clusters in Fig. 2.2. Universities have content that is

used for teaching and some are results of students‘ works such as theses and dissertations,

lecture notes and assignments. These are sometimes digitized or are ‗born digital‘. This

content on Fig. 2.3 is referred to as digitized content.

25

Some content is purely born digital and managed as such. These are referred to as

‗managed content‘ such as students‘ records, graduation records, websites contents,

online faculty publications and e-posters.

From the e-publishing where the university is unlikely to have property rights and rarely

possess the content, licensed content such as subscribed online journals, e-books and

other databases fall into this category. The university is also involved in acquiring digital

content that assist in research. This includes CD-ROMs, research software such as

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and e-books that have been bought and

downloaded onto the university servers.

2.2.3 Applicability of the models to the study

Local Content vs. Global Content Expression and Application Grid

Universities are affected by the northeast quadrant (see Fig. 2.1) by way of availability of

open access journals on the Internet, international search engines such as Google and

Yahoo! The fact that the content within these sources is meant for global users and

international application, reveals the role of the library in enhancing the use of global

content through provision of Internet services and encouraging use of international

websites, open source content and search engines.

KeMU subscribes to the Programme for the Enhancement of Research Information

(PERI), an initiative of the International Network for the Availability of Scientific

Publications (INASP). This programme enables Kenyan institutions of higher learning

26

and research to have access to thousands of scientific journals through the Kenya

Libraries and Information Services Consortium (KLISC). KeMU therefore encouraged

and played a major role in pushing the global content to the local university community.

The locally-owned content should be created, preserved/processed, and disseminated

(UNESCO, 2011) in a manner that the local community that is the university community

can use. The university‘s role is to produce and disseminate knowledge (Badat, 2009) in

the society and being so it produces a lot of content both electronically and manually. The

knowledge produced falls in the southwest quadrant (see fig. 2.1) and can be referred to

as local content as it is the expression of the locally owned knowledge. This knowledge

can, however, be disseminated within the local community context and the global context

thus it can also fall in the southeast quadrant (see fig. 2.1). These two quadrants reveal

that local content is not only content for the local community but also content from the

local community. KeMU generates knowledge in both electronic and non-electronic

formats but how it is processed and disseminated determines its application.

This model reveals that local content creation (collecting, linking and capturing) is

dependent on how well both local and global content is applied to produce/create it. The

preservation/processing (collating, recording and organizing) and dissemination

(packaging, repackaging, marketing and distribution) also determine the application of

local content – whether it will be applied/utilized locally or globally. Bruegge et al.

(2011) concur with this revelation by outlining the steps of local content development as

creation, preservation, dissemination and utilization.

27

Conaway Content Landscape Model

The study sought to understand the management of local content and develop a

framework for its management. The Conway content landscape model presents the

challenges that are faced by universities in management of digital content as an asset,

thus the model included all types of content both local and foreign.

A closer look at Conway‘s model reveals the presentation of local content and the major

challenges universities face. It can be deduced, from the Extended Conway Content

Landscape (see Fig 2.3), the Local Content vs. Global Content Expression and

Application model (see Fig 2.1) and the definition of local content that the half on the left

of Extended Conaway Content Landscape represents the local content and the one on the

right represents the foreign content (see Fig. 2.4). The left represents content that the

university is very likely to have property rights and it is locally sourced. The structure

differs as it can be tight/highly structured like the campus publications, faculty

publications and university journals and could be loosely structured like lecture notes or

individual digital images.

Triangulation of the models

These two models have been triangulated as both of them inform the study in different

ways. The Conaway Content Landscape gives the challenges of content in universities

which includes the local content while the Ballantyne‘s models gives a basis for

definition, expression and application of local content both of which are necessary in this

study. Fig. 2.4 shows the triangulated content landscape model showing the local content

half and foreign content half. This study is interested in the local content half.

28

The figure below shows the triangulation of both Local Content vs. Global Content

Expression and Application Grid and the Extended Content Landscape Model.

Figure 2.4: Triangulated Content Landscape Model Showing the Local Content Half

and Foreign Content Half

This description in fig. 2.3 is in line with the definition by Ballantyne (2002) ―Local

content is the expression of the locally-owned and adapted knowledge of a community -

where a community is defined by its location culture, language, or area of interest‖. This

model shows that local content can be digitized or born digital. This forms the creation

step whereby it does not matter the format as long as the content is locally created.

Foreign content

half

Local content half

29

Digitization and managing the content becomes the processing step. This model also

gives two aspects which informed this study on determination of what can be classified as

local content and global/foreign content – the source of the content (internal or external

of the university) and the property rights (ownership of content).

2.3 Local Content

According to Atnafu (2005), local content is ―content that reflects the language, the

culture, and the real life of a locality or a country‖ (p. 3). He contests that any

information that can be localized (made linguistically and culturally appropriate to a

target locale) qualifies to be local content. This definition has been put to test by

Ballantyne (2002).

He attempts to define local content by giving several definitions:

Content can be defined as local when it is produced in a specified geographical

locality such as a village, province, or even a country or a continent;

The processing and diffusion of information customized in any suitable format to

fit the needs of a specific community;

Content relevant, socially, culturally, economically and politically to a given

society is local content.

The challenge with these definitions is that, for example, the first one indicates that the

locality of production determines whether the content is local to that locality but this is

not necessarily true; for instance, the content produced in India because it is cheaper to

produce books there, this content does not become Indian.

30

The second definition is too general and allows any content that is customized for the

local people to fit as local content. For example, the story of Robin Hood translated in

Swahili according to this definition would be local content. A British Broadcasting

Corporation (BBC) broadcast in the language of the local people about preparation and

preservation of wine in France would be categorized as local content to Kenyans because

it is customized to their language.

The third one is also broad and only gives relevance as the only criteria to look for

making any content wherever produced, whoever produces it, and for what purpose to be

local as long as it has some element of relevance to the local people. This would allow

any news of relevance from Cable News Network (CNN) or BBC to be local content to a

community such as KeMU as long as it has some relevance to research, learning or

teaching that goes on in KeMU.

In regard to a university, Crow (2002) defines the content of an institution repository as

―scholarly; produced, submitted, or sponsored by an institution's faculty (and, optionally,

students), or other authorized agents; non-ephemeral; and licensable in perpetuity‖. Crow

agrees that repository content must be from the institution's members, that is, the local

content composes the repository content and the element of being from the local people

as opposed to being for the local people is emphasized.

To be able to define local content explicitly, one must meet the following points:

the term content must be defined

31

(be exclusive) the definition must not allow that which is not local to creep in

(be inclusive) the definition must include all that which is local

Ballantyne (2002) finally asserts the definition given by participants in the Dar es Salaam

conference on Collecting and propagating local development content which was later

adopted by UNESCO:

―Local content is the expression of the locally-owned and adapted knowledge of a

community, where a community is defined by its location, culture, language, or

area of interest‖.

This means that local content is not something that is necessarily used by members of a

defined community although this is not excluded. This definition includes any global

content that has been transformed, adapted and assimilated into the knowledge base of

the community. E-content, Ballantyne (2002), concludes is local content that is

communicated electronically. UNESCO agrees with this definition but adds that ―the

experience that is relevant to the community‘s situation‖ consists of local content and

community as ―defined by language, location, culture, area of interest and can comprise

of region, sub-region, a nation, a village or a group of people with strong cultural,

linguistic, religious or common interest links‖ (www.unesco.org).

This definition of community by UNESCO brings a new dimension to local content. As

per this definition; the community may comprise of a handful of people or include

32

millions, its members may share the same location or be geographically dispersed.

Community is not static or exclusive and individuals may belong to many communities at

the same time, for example, a female lecturer at KeMU may have strong links with the

community of women in Meru town, take active life in the community of KeMU, and at

the same time, be a member of the Methodist Church in Kenya as well as participate in

the Association of Kenya Psychologists.

For the purposes of this study, local community will be understood to mean: the Kenya

Methodist University community which includes KeMU students, lecturers, non-teaching

staff, partners and development associates. Local content will be understood to be the

expression of all knowledge that has been gained, transformed, assimilated, adapted and

owned by individual or a group of individuals who are part of the KeMU community.

Local content then will be used as the expression of any knowledge by members of

KeMU community and local e-content will be all the knowledge

expressed/communicated electronically by members of KeMU community regardless of

format.

2.3.1 Benefits of Local Content

Benefits of local content include but not limited to:

● Improve people's awareness of their own culture,

● Strengthening their identity and valuation of themselves and their communities in

a non-discriminating way.

33

● Through equal access to both local and global/foreign content and culture in

different places and enabling communication and interaction among such

experiences, people's identity can be built at the same time as their appreciation

and acceptance of other cultures and values, thus promoting a true global culture

of tolerance enhanced and enriched by local values and elements (Levy, 2007).

● Developing local content collections changes local communities in developing

countries from consumers of information into producers of information. This

contributes to the empowerment of local communities.

● The development process of Local Content collections has positive impacts on the

campus communities. The knowledge that their works might be immortalized, and

accessible globally, provides students and faculty members with motivation to

produce better works.

● They also become more aware of copyright and plagiarism issues in the

production of the works.

● Local e-content management provides an opportunity for documentation of

locally-produced content, for example, the digital library system developed for

DesaInformasi was also very beneficial to various academic departments and non-

academic units, which had struggled to find some kind of documentation systems

for their locally-produced works or resources (Tjiek, 2005).

● The promotional efforts of local content within a repository increase the visibility

of some academic departments and non-academic units within the institution.

34

2.4 Local Content Management

While looking at local content management, one needs to define the Content

Management (CM) first as it is the broader of the two. Yu (2005) defines CM as a

process of collecting, organizing, categorizing and structuring informational resources of

any type and format so that they can be saved, retrieved, published, updated and re-

purposed or reused in any way desirable. These CM processes as presented by Yu

requires a content management system that has all the features to meet these processes.

Warren, (2001) considers a full-featured content management system as the one that

takes content from inception to publication and does so in a way that provides for

maximum content accessibility and reuse in easy, timely and accurate maintenance of the

content base. CM is a ―set of technologies that support the evolutionary life cycle of

digital information. This digital information is often referred to as digital content and may

take the form of text, such as documents, multimedia files such as audio or video files, or

other file type which follows a content life cycle which requires management‖.

(www.wikipedia.org).

A content management system is software-based enterprise tools used to collect, manage,

and publish information online. Effective content management should include consistent

and reliable methods to identify requirements, manage authoritative sources of

information, and assemble content on-demand to meet customer needs. Content

management can also help content authors and site managers to organize, control, and

direct information. (http://web.utah.edu)

35

The literature seems to agree that content management system is software that is used to

manage content, that is, collect, organize, and disseminate digital/electronic information.

What is local content management then? These are the processes, and procedures of

collecting, organizing, categorizing and structuring locally expressed knowledge in any

format so that it can be saved, retrieved, published, updated and re-purposed or reused in

any way possible. The key thing here is the expression of locally-owned and adapted

knowledge which could be in any format such as audio, video, text, images, art and so on.

Most institutions do not have specific repositories for locally-produced content rather

they consider all content that is academic, that is, theses and dissertations, research

papers, technical papers and electronic books that the university has rights or have been

donated as content for institutional repository. The idea that a university repository

should contain content for the local community other than from the local community is

emphasized by the digital content landscape model that presents both locally-produced

and globally-sourced content as digital assets of a university (Conway, 2007).

Regardless of the contents of an institutional repository, Yearwood-Jackman (2009) gives

the following as the management activities involved:

• Developing an Institutional Repository (IR) from scratch

• Embedding an IR in the research management processes

• Managing content after it has been deposited in the IR

• Integrating an IR into the research management systems and business processes of

an institution

36

He adds the following as the objectives of an institutional repository:

• Build an IR which would provide increased access and visibility to the research

output worldwide.

• Provide a means of showcasing the research output of an institution in order to

enhance its prestige and increase the citation rate of its staff

• Provide a one-stop shop for all to access the research output and institution

2.4.1 Local Content Creation/Collection

This is the first activity in management of local content. According to the definition of

local content by Ballantyne (2002) local content is locally-owned and adapted

knowledge. This shows that this knowledge is generated or acquired through interaction

with the environment by a community. Interaction is not necessarily limited to within the

members of the community themselves and this is why the adapted knowledge (from

other communities) is part of local content. The creation has the following steps:

identification and acquisition.

Local Content Identification

In identifying content to be classified as local content, criteria needs to be in place for

guiding the librarians on what is recognized as local content. Cohen & Schmidle (2007)

give three priorities considered in identifying content at the Catherwood Library. These

priorities are:

1. Any material (scholarly articles, congressional testimony, etc.) emanating from

37

the university (resident and extension).

2. Scholarly material published or produced by the university.

3. Non-university-produced documents.

Related to Priority 3 is a Digital Repository Submission Agreement that was developed

by Catherwood Library staff and vetted through the Cornell Office of University counsel

(Cohen & Schmidle, 2007). This offers non-locally produced content a place in the

repository as long as the contributors agree with the submission agreement. For this to

work, the policy should be very clear on the definition of local content and what needs to

be done to consider content submitted by non-members of the university community as

local content.

Genoni (2004) in considering the motivation for institutional repositories states that

―faculties consider institutional repositories to be particularly well-suited for various

types of gray literature and other fugitive and unpublished material‖. This material

includes:

Preprints;

Working papers;

Theses and dissertations;

Research and technical reports;

Conference proceedings;

Departmental and research centre newsletters and bulletins;

Papers in support of grant applications;

38

Status reports to funding agencies;

Committee reports and memoranda;

Statistical reports;

Technical documentation; and

Surveys.

From this list, it can be deduced that one way of identifying content for repository is

whether the content is published or not where unpublished content is more likely to be

identified for institutional repository than published content.

Acquisition

Acquisition of local content can be implemented in several ways:

1. Purchasing:

This includes paying money to developers of content such as lecturers, students,

researchers, faculties and so on. This should, however, be viewed as a way of motivating

the content creators rather than buying because the creators benefit by having their

content published in the shortest time as compared to the formal publishing which takes a

lot of time before publishing submitted papers and the advantage of wider access and

accessibility for updating the content.

2. Deposit:

This involves direct access by content creators to the content management system and

then individually uploading the content to the system. There are several ways of doing

39

this:

Self-archiving: this involves the owner of content directive accessing the

local content repository and uploading their work. This results in

automatic access of the content by others or appearing on the

administrators view for approval.

Multi-repository: this refers to the connection between a repository and

another thus resulting in two or more repositories of local content being

merged. This leads to all content in one repository being publicly available

to members of all the joining repositories.

Editor: this is the model where by a gate keeper is involved who decides

what will be uploaded to the local content repository. The editor may

receive the content in any format electronic or print; images; video; sound

or text and applies his/her editing skills and uploads the edited work on the

repository, (Yearwood-Jackman, 2009).

3. Versioning:

This is also referred to as revision control or version control (Wikipedia, 2013). This is a

method whereby creators of content are allowed to make revisions, updates or improve

the works they had submitted earlier to the local content repository. The repository

retains the old copy as it was and adds the revised, updated or improved copy as a new

submitted work. This ensures that the original document is still available as it was while

at the same time the new document is also available. In this way, the creators are able to

easily revise their work and have them up-to-date while at the same time, the repository is

increasing in its collection.

40

4. Legal deposit:

Legal deposit is a legal requirement that a person or group submit copies of their

publications to a repository, usually a library. This is easiest way of developing a

collection for local content repository. This will require every lecturer, researcher or

administrative staffs who produce content to make effort and have it submitted to the

repository as a matter of fulfilling a legal obligation.

2.4.2 Marketing

Most local content is invisible, which calls for vigorous extensive marketing to attract

attention of both contributors and users of locally generated information. There is need to

market the local content, especially to international audiences, via online links. Making

content visible needs to begin at the local level, here, electronic public spaces such as

computer labs could be set up as platforms where community content is produced, and

uploaded to the content management system. Ballantyne (2002) suggests that libraries

should ―…build on many experiences with film and book fairs.‖ Here, the suggestion is

that the libraries should use the same marketing methods and strategies used to market

other library services and products.

But a difference comes in the market niche of local content. First there are those who are

supposed to populate the repository with local content, that is, the university lecturers,

researchers, students, student organizations and other societies of university community

on one hand and the users of the content, that is, the local and global community on the

other hand.

41

Yearwood-Jackman (2009) offers the following methods of advocacy towards the

researcher community of a university:

Enlist support of subject librarians;

Make presentations to various meetings and departments;

Face to face meetings;

Proactive identification of content;

Promoting local ownership and participation.

The way in which content is created and exchanged is as important as the content itself.

Well-established principles and approaches to participatory development can be tapped

and applied in local content development initiatives. The university library must

empower individuals and groups of users to take ownership of the content as well as the

process used to express it. This encourages volunteerism of content from the university

community.

2.5 Access, Retrieval and Use of Local Content

The format in which local content is recorded is a determinant on how it is accessed,

retrieved and used. Most local content is usually with the creators thus it is neither stored

nor processed in a format that is easily accessible. Bruegge et al (2011) noted the

following:

42

―Technology can help support the recognition, creation,

preservation, dissemination and utilization of local content and there

have been several important technological advancements in recent

history. Technological developments such as the printing press, the

phonogram, telephony, radio, television, photocopying machines,

recording media, mobile phones and personal computers, among

others, have greatly increased our ability to create and disseminate

content‖ (pg. 4).

This statement foresees the role of technology as that of facilitator such that that with

technology local content can be easily accessed as the content can be easily reproduced

(printing press, photocopying machines), can be easily moved/transported (telephony,

radio, television) and easily used (computers with internet connection). These

technologies have capability of enhancing access, retrieval and use of local content.

Application of technology to local content does not lead to increased access, retrieval and

use automatically. There are challenges some of which Khan (n.d.) has noted as, the

digital divide, lack of international consensus on norms and principles and inadequate

free flow of and access to data, information and knowledge. Adding to these, access to

knowledge would only be possible if information is available and accessible (UNESCO,

n.d).

Khan (n.d) suggests some basic principles that can ensure access, retrieval and use of

local content:

―Universal access to information (strong public domain of information and access

to ―global public goods‖)

43

Equal access to education, capacity-building and generation and production of

knowledge

Freedom of expression

Preservation and promotion of cultural diversity, including multilingualism‖

These principles form basic human rights. Without the right to information access it

cannot be possible to have communities use local content. Whereas information can be

accessed over the internet, this information needs to be generated and produced. Without

capacity to produce the local content it will be almost impossible for it to be access and

used. The freedom of expression must be guaranteed to every member of a community so

that they are free to express the knowledge they have via the various media formats

available.

ICTs have been used to push foreign content to local communities for a long time and

UNESCO suggests and assist communities to use the same (ICTs) to produce, access,

retrieve and use local content. Khan (nd.) lists the following as the assistance UNESCO

has offered:

Innovative ICT-based content development

Applying 3D interactive software and multimedia techniques to produce

electronic learning materials (e.g. for Rural Water Sanitation).

44

Development and dissemination of tools

Greenstone, a multilingual digital library development tool (Open

Software; developed in cooperation with University of Waikato, New

Zealand)

Capacity building

Training of trainers in how to develop CD-ROMs and multimedia

applications, facilitating the production of new and improved curricula for

teachers in Africa

Managing and revitalizing traditional knowledge

Using multimedia techniques in preserving and disseminating local

heritage (e.g. revitalizing Ancient Pacific Navigation application through

ICTs.)

University libraries have invested in technology but it has been used to push the foreign

content to the community of researchers and students. UNESCO has highlighted the ways

in which these technologies can be used to improve access, retrieval and use of local

content.

2.6 Role of Librarian in Managing Local Content

Law et al (2005) quotes a study conducted by Allard, Mack & Feltner-Reichert (2005)

that found out that two thirds of thirty articles identified or mentioned the involvement of

libraries and librarians in the implementation of institutional repositories. In fact the

entire ethos of the library profession, to provide access, manage, organize and preserve

45

information is both advanced and enhanced by the promotion of digital repositories (Law

et al, 2005).

The librarians‘ role begins prior to the creation of a repository at the point where a

number of strategic decisions must be made. Here, policies are drawn such as on local

content development and collection; who should populate the repository; who would be

responsible for creation of metadata and what kind of materials should be allowed in the

repository. The traditional librarians‘ expertise in collection development, cataloguing

and classification puts librarians at a better place to manage the local content collection,

classifying, and creation of metadata.

The library from a historical view point has been a link between the information

providers and consumers; as such, it is the best suited institution to take the role of

linking the content creators and content users, albeit in a digital environment. It is also

the best suited to implement training and promote the use of repository by exercising the

experience gained in user education over the centuries.

Law et al (2005) shows the role of librarians in retrieval of content form a repository,

―librarians‘ strong understanding of the need for and value of, metadata for effective

information storage and retrieval means that they are likely to invest considerable time

and effort creating high quality metadata and retaining consistency throughout the

repository‘s records‖ (p. 7).

46

In a study on content analysis of the role of librarian in institutional repository found out

that about half of the articles discussed how a library can participate to make the

resources more accessible (Allard, Mack & Fletner-Reichert, 2005). This shows the

importance of the librarian in access of content in a repository be it institutional, multi-

institutional or in just a local content repository.

2.7 Challenges of Local Content Management

Khan (2003) gives the following as the challenges of local content management:

Unequal content creation: Most content comes from providers in the developed

countries.

Inadequate scope of content: Much content reflects language, lifestyles and

concerns that are different from those ―consuming‖ the content.

Inadequate Intellectual Property Right provisions: Local content creators are not

sufficiently recognized in Intellectual Property Rights systems.

Khan also identifies the following as the challenges for local content creation

Limited financial resources of developing countries for content production;

Inappropriate training opportunities for content creators;

Lack of access to advanced technology (production units, digital cameras, digital

studios);

Low motivation and commitment at the decision-making level to change the

situation;

Market forces, which do not encourage diversity.

47

Jenkins, Breakstone and Hixson (2005) notes the challenges and barriers authors meet in

submitting materials to institutional repository,

―The traditional culture of academic publishing accounts for some of

the resistance to IRs; journal and monograph publication processes are

deeply embedded in the scholarly process. Across disciplines,

publishing in journals and monographs has been the standard for over

100 years, and integrating a new genre into scholarly communication is

a significant challenge. Faculty depends on the traditional genres of

communication not only to disseminate research, but also to get tenure

and establish themselves in their field‖ (p. 6).

Other challenges include:

Fear of disrupting existing relationships with publishers;

Concerns about the equivalence between IR and journal publishing;

Ignorance of the copyright law;

Reluctance for research to be made public without proper vetting;

Reluctance to modify bureaucratic processes;

Reluctance to have a university stamp on their scholarly output;

Technophobia or mistrust of the long-term viability of digital content; and

Lack of time to learn how to do something different.

2.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter has presented the triangulation of local and global content expression and

application grid model and the Conway Content landscape Model. These two models

have been used to show how local content can be compared to global content in aspects

of production and application as well as how the local content can be separated from the

foreign content and its challenges and prospects be studied.

48

The reviewed literature reveals that the institutional repositories have been used to some

extent to manage local content although this is not the main purpose. Several authors

have concurred that the institutional repository content should be scholarly and from the

members of the institution. It has been noted that not all local content is scholarly and not

all scholarly content can be local thus most authors on institutional repositories have not

agreed on the preferred content of local content leaving institutions to decide what

content should be included. This lack of agreement has necessitated the need for a study

to seek for local content management challenges and develop a model on how on how to

efficiently and effectively manage local content.

49

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This Chapter describes, under respective sections, the research method adopted for the

study, the study population and population sampling procedures, data collection methods

and tools, procedure for data collection and the data analysis methods used. The study

adopted both positivism and interpretivism approach and hence used both questionnaire

and interview data collection methods.

3.2 Research Design

The research method adopted for this study was the survey research method. This method

has the advantage of providing for a more in-depth investigation and allowing for both

small and large populations to be studied and enable generalization of results (Robson,

2002). The survey method adopted applied a triangulation of both qualitative and

quantitative approaches.

Qualitative approach, according to Mora (2010), is exploratory and it is used to go deeper

into issues of interest and explore nuances related to the problem at hand. Common data

collection methods used in qualitative research is focus groups, triads, dyads, in-depth

interviews, uninterrupted observation, bulletin boards, and ethnographic

participation/observation. This study chose to use in-depth interviews to sampled

lecturers, librarians and informants.

50

Quantitative approach on the other hand seeks to quantify data and generalize results

from a sample to the population of interest and to measure the incidence of various views

and opinions in a chosen sample. Structured techniques such as print and online

questionnaires, on-street or telephone interviews are used (―Qualitative vs. Quantitative

Research‖, n.d.). This study opted for print questionnaires which were issued to the

sampled respondents in all KeMU campuses.

Positivism/quantitative takes objectivity and replicability as important criteria and

maintains that reliable knowledge is based on direct, verifiable observation or

manipulation of natural phenomena through empirical/experimental means and should be

value free while interpretivism/qualitative approach maintains that the world is

constructed, interpreted and experienced by people in their interactions within their

environment and relies on subjective meanings, perceptions of people, and contexts

(Weber, 2004).

By employing these different research paradigms, the study was able to compensate for

the inherent weaknesses in each. Whereas the quantitative approach involves a problem

solving approach that is highly structured in nature and that relies on the quantification of

concepts (Powell & Connawy, 2004), qualitative approach allows the researcher to have

detailed understanding of the perspectives of those involved in events. The application of

these two approaches allowed the research to employ interview schedules and

questionnaires as data collection tools thus gaining detailed insight into the problem from

the macro and micro sociologist point of view.

51

3.3 Study Population

This study‘s population was KeMU community members. However, in order to achieve

the study objectives and answer research questions, it was necessary to obtain data from

KeMU community members who were creators and consumers of local content and those

whose positions influenced the creation, collection and consumption of local content in

one way or the other. The study population comprised all the five KeMU campuses as

shown in the table below.

Table 3.1: Composition of study population

Campus Librarians Students Lecturers

Deans and

Heads of

Programs Total

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Meru 12 39 4230 35 34 20 5 50 4,349 34

Nairobi 10 32 6256 51 70 42 5 50 6,481 51

Nyeri 3 10 354 3 22 13 0 0 423 3

Mombasa 4 13 707 6 30 18 0 0 801 6

Nakuru 2 6 700 6 11 7 0 0 735 6

Total 31 100 12247 100 167 100 10 100 12,789 100

Key informants included University Librarian, ICT Director, and Deputy Vice-

Chancellor Academic and Administration (DVC AA)

52

As shown in tables 3.1 above, there are four categories that comprise the study

population. These are as follows:

Category 1: Librarians with exception of the university librarian.

Category 2: Students in all academic levels and registered in all modes of study

such as full-time, part-time, weekend-intensive and distance learning mode.

Category 3: Lecturers both full-time and part-time

Category 4: Deans and programme heads

3.4 Population Sampling

Different sampling techniques were used which was in line with the study‘s concern of

seeking information from specific groups in the population. These were stratified, census,

systematic and purposive sampling methods. Sampling was desired because of the

triangulation approach taken by the study. Qualitative approach requires that a small size

of the population be considered due to the nature of data sought.

By use of stratified sampling, the population was divided into five strata spread through

all the five campuses. These are as follows:

1. Librarians

2. Students

3. Lecturers

4. Deans and programme heads

53

Form the first stratum – librarians – purposive sampling technique was applied so that

only collection development and electronic services librarians were selected. This

selection is based on the librarians‘ involvement with local content management.

Collection development librarians were in charge of acquisition and organization of all

print information resources in the library. Having these duties in their docket, the

researcher was satisfied that they had the information necessary for the present study.

Electronic services librarian on the other hand are in charge of acquisition, management,

and use of electronic information resources. Local content being in both print and

electronic formats, the researcher was convinced that the electronic services librarians

had appropriate information for the study.

The intention of the researcher was to sample two librarians from each campus

representing both collection development and electronic services sections but the reality

on the ground did not allow this as Nakuru Campus lacked an electronic services

librarian. However, Meru campus had a digital librarian and an electronic services

librarian whose roles were overlapping: digital librarian was in charge of acquisition of

electronic resources from without the institution such as e-journals and e-books while the

electronic services acquired electronic resources from other sources such as websites,

past papers, lecture notes. Both assisted in management and use of all the electronic

resources while at the same time each had several library computers to man in different

locations within the library. The researcher selected both of them and the collection

54

development librarian thus ending up with a sample of three librarians from Meru

Campus.

From Nairobi, Nyeri and Mombasa campuses, one collection development and one

electronic service librarian was selected from each campus. This resulted to a sample of

10 librarians in the librarian‘s stratum. The use of purposive sampling was justified on

the basis that it helped in selection of information-rich elements from the population

which was extremely useful to this study.

Systematic sampling method was used to derive representative samples from both

students and lecturers‘ strata. Systematic sampling involves the selection of every nth

unit

in the population or sampling frame. The sampling frame was obtained from students‘

records departments in all the campuses and was used in selection of the sample.

The study applied 95% confidence level and 5% margin of error to the students‘

population (12,247). The following sample size formula was used.

ss = Z2 * (p) * (1-p) /c

2

Where:

ss = Sample Size

Z = Z value (1.96 for 95% confidence level)

p = percentage picking a choice, expressed as decimal (.5 used for sample size

needed)

c = margin of error expressed as decimal (0.05 = ±5)

55

(Source: University of Florida, 2008)

Thus for this study the sample was:-

(1.962*0.5*(1-0.5)/0.05

2) = 384.16

Because the target population was not infinite, the Finite Population Correction (FPC)

factor was applied. The following finite population correction formula was used:-

N

n

nn

1

'

Where:

n = sample size based on the calculations above, and

N = population size.

n’= corrected sample size

The corrected sample size in relation to the target population was:

384.16/1+ (384.16/12247) = 372.5

This resulted in a sample size of 373. This was further distributed to all campuses by

percentage of students‘ population. Consequently, Meru campus had a sample of 129

which is 35%, Nairobi had 191 which is 51%, Nyeri had 11 which is 3% and Mombasa

had 22 which 6% and Nakuru had 21 which 6% of the sample size.

Sampling interval was arrived at by applying the systematic sampling formula of finding

the Kth

element. Systematic sampling is a statistical method involving the selection of

elements from an ordered sampling frame. According to Wikipedia (2011) the most

56

common form of systematic sampling is an equal-probability method, in which every Kth

element in the frame is selected and it is calculated as:-

Where n is the sample size, and

N is the population size.

For Meru campus, the sampling interval was 33, Nairobi (33), Nyeri (32), Mombasa (32)

and Nakuru (33). Using this procedure, each element in the population has a known and

equal probability of selection.

Considering that this was a homogenous group, the first respondent was selected

randomly from the sampling frame and then every other one was selected according to

the interval. This was repeated for each campus.

For the lecturers, the sampling frame was obtained from the Human Resource

Department. Since lecturers were interviewed, it was necessary to get a small sample.

This was in line with Hancock‘s (1998) observation that the intensive and time-

consuming nature of qualitative data collection necessitates the use of small samples.

Consequently, 30 per cent was considered adequate to draw a sample from all the

campuses. This resulted in having a sample of 10 for Meru, 21 for Nairobi, 6 for Nyeri, 9

for Mombasa and 3 for Nakuru.

57

Sampling interval for selection was reached at by application of the formula above,

resulting to every 3rd

lecturer to be selected from the sampling frame for Meru, Nairobi,

and Mombasa campuses while for Nakuru and Nyeri campuses every 4th

lecturer was

selected. Systematic sampling was preferred for the students and lecturers strata because

of its strength in providing unbiased way of selecting the sample.

From the fourth stratum – Deans and Heads of Programmes – census was used so that all

Deans and Heads of Programmes were selected. There were five Deans and Heads of

Programmes in both Nairobi and Meru campuses while other campuses had none. All

programmes of study offered in other campuses were supported by the Deans and

Programmed Heads in Nairobi Campus while those at Meru support programmes in Meru

Campus.

Census was applied because Deans and Head of Programmes were policy makers and

thus had influence on how students and lecturers created and used local content. They

were few in number and it was possible to conduct interview to all of them. The fifth

stratum contains the key Informants – the University Librarian, ICT Director and DVC

Administration and Academic. In this stratum, census was used to select all key

informants.

University librarian was considered as key informant on the basis of the role played in

local content development and use. University Librarian (UL) is responsible for policy

formulation, planning, development and implementation regarding information

58

collection, organization, use and marketing. UL is also in charge of both print and

electronic resources and is important in determining how local content is managed at

KeMU library.

The ICT Director was considered on the basis of being the person in charge of provision

and maintenance of ICTs in KeMU. Local content is in both print and electronic formats

thus policies that affect ICTs are bound to affect the acquisition, management and use of

electronic local content.

DVC AA on the other hand was selected because he/she is the highest policy maker in

KeMU on academic issues. Information provision being under the academic docket, the

policy formulated and developed by DVC AA will in one way or another have effect on

the management of local content in KeMU.

Consequently, the study ended up with a sample size of 445 (sampled population plus the

key informants). The distribution of this sample is as shown in the table below.

59

Table 3.2: Composition of Sample

Campus Librarians Students Lecturers

Deans and

Heads of

Programmes Total

No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Meru 3 30 129 35 10 20 5 50 147 33

Nairobi 2 20 191 51 21 43 5 50 219 49

Nyeri 2 20 11 3 6 12 0 0 19 4

Mombasa 2 20 22 6 9 18 0 0 33 7

Nakuru 1 10 21 6 3 6 0 0 25 6

Total 10

373

49

10

442 100

3.5 Data Collection Methods

Two tools were used to collect data, namely, questionnaires and interview schedules. A

questionnaire, according to Kothari (2004), consists of questions printed or typed in a

definite order on a form or set of forms and meant to be filled by the respondents without

supervision. Kasomo (2007) aggress with Kothari that questionnaires are carefully

designed instruments (typed, printed or written) for collecting data directly from

respondents.

Interviews on the other hand involve presentation of oral-verbal stimuli and reply in

terms of oral-verbal responses (Kothari, 2004). It is a way of obtaining data from a

person by asking rather than by watching him (respondent) behave (Kasomo, 2007).

60

These two data collection methods were also used to comply with the research approach

taken by the study – triangulation of qualitative/interpretivism and

quantitative/positivism.

3.5.1 Questionnaires

Questionnaires are lists of questions, printed or typed, meant to be filled by respondents

without supervision. The researcher designed a questionnaire for students (see appendix

A) with both open-ended and close-ended type of questions.

The close-ended questions gave the researcher opportunity to collect bio data which was

necessary for understanding the respondents. This bio data is also very important in

assisting to draw relationships among respondents and local content management.

Open-ended questions on the other hand were used to establish respondent views on

some issues such as what can be done to improve access to local content and to establish

their knowledge on issues such as the number of journal articles published by KeMU

lecturers.

The selection of questionnaire was based on the widely spread and large number of

students in KeMU. Since students in all the campuses were sampled and some of them

were in distance learning mode, implying that they were dispersed in areas such as

Mombasa, Nakuru, Meru and even far flung areas like Mandera, the questionnaire were

best suited as they did not require supervised answering.

61

3.5.2 Interviews

Interview schedules were used to collect data from lecturers, Deans and Heads of

Programmes, librarians and key informants.

Seven interview schedules were designed each for the following respondents:

a) Lecturers (see appendix B)

b) Collection development librarians (see appendix C)

c) Electronic services librarians (see appendix D)

d) Dean and Heads of Programmes (see appendix E)

e) University Librarian (see appendix F)

f) ICT Director (see appendix G)

g) DVC AA (see appendix H)

Interview schedules were preferred to questionnaires for these groups because they

enabled the researcher to have a better perspective of the status of local content creation,

management and use in KeMU. Although interviews were considered the most expensive

form of data collection, the researcher was able to access high quality data and an equally

high response rate.

One of the objectives was to develop a model for KeMU local content management. This

objective required high quality data to achieve, thus the use of interview schedules.

Interviews also provided opportunity for the respondents to ask for clarification for issues

that came up during the interview. They also allowed the researcher to seek clarification

on issues that came up as the interview progressed.

62

3.6 Procedure for Data Collection

A request for data required was sent to both Students‘ Records and Human Resource

departments and a list of all learners and lecturers from all campuses was provided.

Questionnaires were distributed to the campuses by the help of librarians at the different

campuses. Students were allowed two weeks to fill and return the questionnaires. These

questionnaires were later collected and sent to the researcher.

Interviews were conducted in the following manner. The researcher contacted key

informants through their secretaries and booked appointments. This was replicated for

Deans and Heads of Programmes. For lecturers, the researcher called them directly to

book for an appointment. A few of them requested to have the interview on phone as they

could not be reached physically, especially, those who were attending workshops and

conferences outside Kenya. Most of the researchers agreed to the interview immediately.

The researcher tried and succeeded to book appointment with lecturers at Mombasa,

Nakuru, Nyeri and Meru within the same week.

In all cases, the researcher introduced himself to the respondents and gave a summary of

the topic under study, its purpose and how they could benefit from the survey. They were

explained on confidentiality of the data collected.

63

3.7 Data Analysis

Since data was both qualitative and quantitative, both qualitative and quantitative

techniques were applied to allow the researcher to categorize and recognize relationships

between units of data.

Qualitative data was analyzed by application of the notice, collect and think general

model where the researcher was noticing, collecting and thinking all at the same time.

This model has the following characteristics which made it appealing for analyzing

qualitative data (Seidel, 1998):

Iterative and Progressive: this characteristic enabled the researcher to think about

the data he was collecting while noticing new data to be gathered leading to

collection of more data. This kept on repeating until all necessary data was

collected and analyzed.

Recursive: This characteristic enabled the researcher while thinking about the

data to go back to previous part of an interview that led to more data being

collected, collated and relationships drawn.

Holographic: this meant that each step in the process contained the entire

process. This enabled the researcher to notice, think and collect during data

collection and also during analysis where the researcher often referred to other

interview recordings to find more related data.

Quantitative data was analyzed by application of descriptive statistics. The statistical

package, SPSS, was used in calculating the measures of central tendency, and measures

64

of dispersion which were presented in tabular form, bar graph and pie charts. Analysis

took consideration of study objectives. Interpretation involved stating what results

revealed, their meaning and significance to the research objectives. Bias was avoided as

much as possible by the researcher in both analysis and interpretation.

3.8 Ethical Considerations

Research ethics are a set of principles or guidelines that assist the researcher in making

difficult research decisions and in deciding which goals are most important in reconciling

conflicting values.

The researcher observed the research ethics and made sure that:-

the identity of respondents was kept strictly confidential;

no individual was compelled to participate as a respondent prior to being

informed of the study‘s mission and objectives;

no pressure or inducement of any kind was applied to encourage an

individuals to become a subject of research;

no fabrication or falsification of data occurred during and after the study;

and

Integrity of the highest order was observed by the researcher.

3.9 Chapter Summary

This chapter has described the methodology used in the study. Both qualitative and

quantitative approaches have been used. The methodology chosen was survey because it

allows a selection of population to be studied and generalization is possible. Data

65

collection tools – questionnaires and interview schedules – have been described and

procedure for data collection presented. Qualitative data analysis followed the notice,

collect and think general model (Seidel, 1998) while quantitative data was analyzed by

use of descriptive statistics.

66

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the result of the data collected from the field. This data has been

presented, analyzed and interpreted according to the objectives of the study.

4.2 Response Rate

The data was collected from 293 (79%) students, 26 (53%) lecturers, 10 (100%)

librarians, 10 (100%) deans/heads of programmes and three informants (DVC-AA, UL

and ICT director).

Figure 4.1: Response Rate of Respondents

Students Lecturers informants LibrariansDeans/head

of prorammes

total sampled 373 49 3 10 10

respondents 293 26 3 10 10

response rate (%) 79 53 100 100 100

373

49

3 10 10

293

263 10 10

7953

100 100 100

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

67

293 (79%) the sampled students responded to the questionnaire while 26 (53%) lecturers

were interviewed. All sampled librarians and deans/head of porgrammes were

interviewed. This response rate can be relied upon to draw conclusions as most of

students and lecturers sampled responded and all librarians, deans/head of programmes

and informants were interviewed.

4.3 Characteristics of Respondents

It was necessary to find out the characteristics of the respondents as they affected how

they used and participated in local content management in KeMU. The characteristics

included academic level, duration of respondents in KeMU, mode of study, qualifications

and the work of lecturers.

4.3.1 Academic Level of Students

It was necessary to find out the academic level of respondents because this affected the

way they created accessed, retrieved and used local content.

68

Figure 4.2: Academic Level of Students (n=293)

Figure 4.2 reveals that most of students, 266 (91%), were undergraduates. The students

pursuing Masters Degree were 18 (6%) while there were only 9 (3%) students who were

in the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) level.

For students, the data reveals that undergraduates comprised the largest part of students

partly due to the number of semesters they needed to cover and also the high number of

courses at undergraduate level on offer. The Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) was relatively

new as the first group was yet to graduate and at Masters Degree level only two degrees

were on offer: Masters in Business Administration and in Masters in Finance and

Investment.

Undergraduates Masters PhD <PhD

Frequency 266 18 9 0

Percentage (%) 91 6 3 0

266

189

0

91

6 3 00

50

100

150

200

250

300

69

4.3.2 Qualifications of Lecturers, Librarians and Deans/Heads of Programmes

The qualification of lecturers, librarians and deans/HOPs was necessary as it had affect

on the way they created accessed, retrieved and used local content.

Table 4.1: Qualification of Lecturers, Librarians and Deans/Heads of Prgrammes

Qualification Lecturer Librarians

Deans/Heads of

Programmes

Bachelors

Frequency 3 7 0

Percentage (%) 12 70 0

Masters

Frequency 21 3 3

Percentage (%) 81 30 30

PhD

Frequency 2 0 3

Percentage (%) 8 0 30

Post PhD

Frequency 0 0 4

Percentage (%) 0 0 40

21 (81%) of the lecturers had a Masters qualification. Those with Bachelors qualification

were 12 (12%) and only 2 (8%) had Doctorate degree. This can be explained by the

requirement necessary for one to be a lecturer. One must have Masters Degree and

willingness to take a PhD degree. Those who did not have a Masters qualification were

teaching assistants.

For Librarians, 7 (70%) had Bachelors qualification and only 3 (30%) had Masters

qualification. KeMU library did not have any librarian with a PhD qualification. The

deans/heads of programmes was the most highly qualified group of respondents with 4

70

(40%) post PhD qualification while those with masters and PhD qualifications comprised

3 (30%) respondents each.

4.3.3 Duration of Respondents in KeMU

It was found important to determine the respondents‘ duration in KeMU as this would

reveal the familiarity with the university information systems, data sources and local

content management. The longer one was in KeMU, the more time they had to create,

participate in management and interact with local content. Students‘ duration was

determined by the academic year while staff was determined by the years they had been

working in KeMU.

The table below shows the duration in KeMU for students.

Figure 4.3: Duration of Students in KeMU (n=293)

1 Year 2 Years 3 years 4 yeaers5 years and

above

Frequency 22 126 100 30 15

Percentage 8 43 34 10 5

22

126

100

30

158

4334

105

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

71

From table 4.3 above, we can deduce that most of the students, 126 (43%), were in their

second-year while those in their third-year were 100 (34%). Those in fourth-year were 30

(10%) and those in first-year were 22 (8%). The high number in second-year can be

explained; students in Masters, undergraduate and PhD level all go through the first and

second-year of studies and also at this time they are well versed with KeMU information

sources thus can easily contribute and make use of local content more often than those in

first-year of study.

Those in first year-were new students who either did not contribute or make use of local

content or were not aware of local content availability in KeMU. Those in third-year

were undergraduates only because there were no master‘s courses that went beyond

second-year. The fourth-year composed of undergraduates who had to take four years -

these came direct from secondary school. KeMU used per trimester credit transfer system

which allowed students to be exempted on some units thus taking shorter period to

complete a degree course. This is also the reason why there were few students in their

third and forth years. Those students who had spent more than four years in KeMU were

15 (5%). These students were found to be Masters level students who continued their

studies from undergraduate level.

72

Figure 4.4: Duration of Lecturers, Librarians and Deans/Programme Heads at KeMU

From figure 4.4 above, 12 (46%) lecturers had been in KeMU for one year. Only 5 (19%)

lecturers had been in KeMU for more than four years, another 5 (19%) had been lecturers

for four years and only 2 (8%) had been working in KeMU for 2 and 3 years respectively.

Most librarians 4 (40%) had spent three years in KeMU while those who had been in the

university for four, five years and above were 3 (30%) each. Deans/head of programmes

had spent most time as 5 (50%) had spent four years and 2 (20%) were in KeMU for five

years and above. Three(30%), of the deans had spent three years in KeMU.

These findings show that the sample can be relied upon to give more insight on local

content management in KeMU as the respondents had more time in KeMU to interact

with information systems and local content. The more the duration of respondents, the

1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years5 and above

years

Lecturers 12 2 2 5 5

Librarians 0 0 4 3 3

Deans/Programme heads 0 0 3 5 2

12

2 2

5 5

0 0

43 3

0 0

3

5

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

73

more they were expected to have participated in management, interacted with and used

local content.

4.3.4 Mode of Study of Students

The researcher found it necessary to determine the mode of study of sampled students

because of the different modes offered by KeMU. The following were the modes of study

any student had to choose from:

a) Full-time

b) Part-time (Evening)

c) Part-time (Weekend intensive)

d) Open and Distance Learning Mode (ODLM)

These modes determined how long each student spent within KeMU campuses and thus

had an effect on how much local content can be created, used, and accessed by the

students. Figure 4.5 shows the different modes of study and number of students

subscribing to each.

74

Figure 4.5: Mode of study

From figure 4.5, it is evident that there is negligible difference between the number of

students who chose part-time 122 (41%) and full time 126 (43%) mode of study.

Those who opted for weekend intensive were 9 (3%) while those who subscribed to

ODLM mode were 37 (13%). This data reveals that most of respondent are full-time

while weekend-intensive are the least. This means that most students had more time to

Full time12643%

Part time12241%

Weekend Intensive9

3%

ODLM37

13%

Full time Part time Weekend Intensive ODLM

75

interact with information management and hence local content in KeMU. This data also

reveals how ODLM students who had limited time within the campuses access, use and

participate in management of local content.

4.3.5 Work Lecturers Were Involved In

It was found important to find out the work lecturers were involved in as this affected

their use of local content in KeMU. Those involved in research work had more need for

local content than those involved in teaching only.

Table 4.2 shows the work lecturers did at KeMU.

Table 4.2: Work of Lecturers in KeMU (n=26, multiple responses)

Work Frequency Percentage (%)

Lecturing/teaching 26 100

Administration 2 8

Research 7 27

All the lecturers were involved in one way or another in lecturing/teaching. Lecturers

were allowed to select more than once and thus some indicated that apart from

lecturing/teaching they were also involved in administration and research in the

university. Those who were involved in research were 7 (27%) and those involved in

administration were 2 (8%) of the sample.

76

This data reveals that all lecturers taught, some had a hand in administration and others

were involved in research. This gives the data collected authenticity as these different

levels of work meant that they needed different information thus varying levels in,

creation, processing, dissemination and use of local content.

4.4 Types of Local Content

The study sought to find out the local content created and used in KeMU. This was

necessary because the aim of the study was to investigate the management of local

content at KeMU, establish the challenges and develop an effective and efficient local

content management model for KeMU.

The table below shows the types of local content and popularity among both students and

lecturers.

Table 4.3: Types of local content and their popularity

Type of local

content

Students (n=293, Multiple

Responses)

Lecturers (n=26, Multiple

Responses)

Frequency Percentage

(%)

Frequency Percentage (%)

Lecture notes 154 52 20 77

KeMU

publications

126 43 26 100

Research papers 100 34 26 100

Research

Proceedings

33 11 21 82

Research reports 42 14 17 66

Theses and

Practicum

46 16 6 24

Past papers

(examination

question papers)

260 88 26 100

ODLM manuals 38 13 13 50

77

Past papers (examination questions done previously) were the most popular type of local

content with a popularity of 260 (88%) and 26 (100%) for students and lecturers

respectively. Lecture notes were second in popularity; 154 (52%) and 20 (77%) for

students and lecturers in that order. This was because all part-time and full-time students

who attend classes had access to lecture notes directly from lecturers while those who did

not, got them from fellow students. Past papers were very important as they were revision

tools for the students and guides to teaching and examination preparation by lecturers.

KeMU publications and research papers followed with 126 (43%) and 100 (34%)

respectively for students and 26 (100%) for lecturers. Students did not use these

publications frequently as they contained research information and most of it was

localized. They would use it for projects and theses preparation. For lecturers, these were

important information sources because they used them for preparing class notes, research

and preparation of conference papers. Research proceedings was the least popular type of

local content among the students with only 33 (11%) while theses and practicum was the

least popular among the lecturers at 6 (24%). Theses and dissertation were only required

by students during theses and project writing and were rarely used by lecturers unless

while teaching research methods course.

ODLM manuals were only popular to 38 (13%) of students and 13 (50%) of lecturers.

ODLM manuals were a unique type of local content as it was only used by students

subscribing to ODLM mode of study. Lecturers were responsible for developing the

ODLM manuals therefore they made use of them.

78

KeMU had 40 publications which included books, magazines, journals, official

publications and research reports published in collaboration with other institutions. The

pie chart below presents the composition of these publications.

Figure 4.6: Composition of KeMU Publications

KeMU published different types of content as presented in figure 4.6. Official

publications such as university calendars, time-tables, work schedules, bulletins,

brochures, graduation lists, were 20 (50%). Reports from collaboration work with other

institutions such as the Kenyatta National Hospital, other universities and individual

Journals1

2%

Collaboration8

20%

Official publications20

50%

Books6

15%

Magazines5

13%

Composistion of KeMU Publications (n=40)

Journals Collaboration Official publications Books Magazines

79

researchers accounted for8 (20%) while books by KeMU community members such as

lecturers held a 6 (15%) share. Magazines, both by the students and university

departments accounted for 5 (13%) while one journal – International Journal for

Professional Practice (IJPP) – accounted for 2% of KeMU publications.

4.4.1 Collaboration with other Organizations

KeMU was in collaboration with various institutions for training and research purposes.

Examples included, Maua hospital, Kenyatta National Hospital and the African Medical

and Research Foundation (AMREF). In all these collaborations, there was neither a well

set policy on how the content was produced, created or published nor how it was

processed, disseminated and used.

Only KNH memorandum of understanding with KeMU mentions that there shall be co-

ownership of publications generated from the collaboration. The lack of emphasis on

local publication for the collaborating members can be used to explain the few number of

research output from KeMU and also the few publications, that is, the International

Journal of Professional Practice (IJPP) as well as KeMU‘s defunct Bits and Bites

magazine.

4.4.2 Local Content in Teaching Departments

The teaching departments in KeMU agreed on the following statements:-

a) The departments did not have a policy on management of the content they

developed.

80

b) The departments did not deposit their content to the library due to the following

reasons:-

The library was not receptive

The department had no guidelines on how to deposit materials with the

library

The library had never made efforts to create awareness that this was

possible.

c) Authors were responsible on the management of their own content.

d) ODLM department managed the distance learning information manuals for itself.

e) For the Information Science department, there was a budget for an information

centre that was to be in charge of managing local content from the department.

For the other departments there were no plans for this.

f) All teaching departments had several publications by their teaching staff

published by various peer-reviewed national and international journals.

g) All heads of departments required administrative/official documents for their

work such as University policy documents and government documents which

were not found in the library therefore they rarely used the library.

h) All Deans/HOPs rated the library as very important in their work yet they rarely

used it.

i) They stated the following as the role of the library.

To collect every document, preserve, collate and disseminate.

To lead rather than follow other departments in the creation, collection,

preservation and dissemination of local content.

81

4.4.3 Local Content vs. External Content

The study found out that local content was less popular than external content. This has

been supported by Ballantyne (2002) ―at present, the strongest push is from external

content meant for local consumption‖ pg. 2. The external content is strongly and easily

availed to users than local content thus there is 64% of external content use compared

with 36% local content use. This external content is available from various sources on the

World Wide Web (WWW).

The pie chart below summarizes the findings.

Figure 4.7: Local Content vs. External Content

KeMU Local Content36%

External Content64%

Local vs. External Content

KeMU Local Content External Content

82

External content included e-books, e-journals, books, journals and databases. These were

the most in library collection and this could be the reason why they were popular. KeMU

had published few journals and books thus students and lecturers could not fully depend

on them. The library faced several challenges in making users aware of local content such

as inadequate marketing strategies, lack of policy for local content as well as inadequate

staff dedicated for local content creation and management. This meant that the local

content remained unknown to users and thus not popular.

There was also an ownership challenge with local content. Departments that created local

content often did not hand it over to the library, especially, the journals, ODLM study

modules and materials from the university departments. This resulted in this local content

remaining in the departments or individual's offices where they could not be easily

accessed by users.

The types of local content that were available in KeMU were in tandem with what is

recommended by Genoni, (2004). He considered local content in a university to include:

preprints, working papers, theses and dissertations, research and technical reports,

conference proceedings, departmental and research center newsletters and bulletins,

papers in support of grant applications, status reports to funding agencies, committee

reports and memoranda, statistical reports, technical documentation and surveys.

83

From this list, it can be deduced that non-published materials such as lecture notes, past

papers, theses and dissertations and ODLM manuals constituted local content. KeMU,

however, lacked preprints, statistical reports, technical documents and surveys and grant

papers. The inclusion of KeMU publications, research papers and proceedings among

KeMU local content can be supported by Cohen and Schmidle (2007) who gives the

following as priorities in identification of local content in a university:

Any material (scholarly articles, congressional testimony, e.t.c) emanating

from the university (resident and extension).

Scholarly material published or produced by the university.

Non-university-produced documents.

These fall in local content as they have emanated from KeMU or have been produced by

the university.

4.5 Capturing, Processing and Dissemination of Local Content

To achieve the aim and objectives of this study, it was found necessary to find out how

identification, capturing, processing and dissemination of local content was done in

KeMU.

4.5.1 Identification of Local Content

The table below presents local content in KeMU and how they were identified

84

Table 4.4: Local Content Identification

Local content type Identification

Journal Published by KeMU

ODLM Manuals Commissioned by KeMU

Past papers Produced by KeMU

examination department

Conference papers Conference held/sponsored by

KeMU

Collaboration reports KeMU recognized as a

partner.

Magazines Publication by KeMU

Books Authored by KeMU Staff

Official publications Produced by KeMU

Research reports Authored by KeMU staff

Theses and dissertations Produced as an academic

requirement at KeMU

Conference proceedings Published by KeMU

From the table it is evident that KeMU identifies local content by involvement of KeMU

in its publishing or production. Published and unpubslihded materials were identified as

local content as long as KeMU or KeMU staff was involved in its production or if the

activity (for example conference) took place at KeMU.

All publications by KeMU were also identified as local content, for example, the IJPP

journal which publishes articles from KeMU staff and students as well as from other

contributors. This, however, does not make the articles contributed by non-KeMU

community members external content.

85

This view of local content identification is the same as the one noted by Cohen and

Schmidle (2007) and Genoni (2004), they state that local content composes of:-

a) material emanating from university

b) scholarly material published or produced by the university

c) non-university produced documents

d) unpublished materials

The books identified by KeMU as local content although not published by KeMU are

authored by the university community members and thus they fall under non-university

produced documents. Policy on local content according to Cohen and Schmidle (2007)

offer and directs identification of local content. Without it, local content may not be

easily identified leading to unbalanced, unequally presented and uncoordinated collection

of local content. This is what KeMU had as a result of lack of a policy on local content.

KeMU does not have a local content policy, what exists are adhoc agreements/guidelines

for specific publications such as journal articles – where some are published in the

International Journal of Professional Practice (IJPP), ODLM manuals, research projects

for undergraduates and theses for Masters Degree students which is a requirement for

graduation.

KeMU did not have a general policy on creation, collection, processing, dissemination

and use of local content. The library had not ventured into local content management

because there was no local content policy in place. The library had past papers as the only

local content.

86

4.5.2 Processing of Local Content

In KeMU processing of local content involved;

a) capturing/creation

b) organizing

c) storage

The table below shows the processing details of various local types of content.

Table 4.5: Local Content Processing

Capturing/creation Organizing Storage

Journal Articles received from

authors by research

directorate

Organized into

journal articles,

journals classified

in the library

Shelved in the

library, stored at

research

directorate and

marketing

departments for

sale, one copy

distributed free to

each department

and each

contributor

ODLM

Manuals

Created by various academic

departments and captured

into unit-specific modules

Arranged by

courses and units

in the ODLM

department store

Stored in ODLM

store

87

Past papers Created by various academic

departments. Library gets

copies from the varsity

examination department

Posted to past

papers

management

system and

categorized by

keywords

Uploaded to the

Past papers

management

system in the

library

Collaboration

reports

Created by different

collaboration projects

- Stored in

participating

departments

Magazines Created by departments and

sent to library department

Classification Shelves

Books Acquired, gifts, exchanges Classification Shelves

Official

publications

Created by different

departments and sent to

library

Classification Shelves

Research

reports

Reproduced from journals

and repositories / received

from departments

Classification Printed and

shelved/ stored as

computer files

Theses and

dissertations

Created by students and

selected few sent to library

from academic departments

Classification Library shelves

Conference

proceedings

Recorded/acquired during

conferences

- Shelved in

department

responsible for the

conference

Lecture notes Created by lecturers and

Captured by students in

class

- -

88

From the table above, one can discern that KeMU did not have a uniform way of dealing

with local content creation/capturing, organizing and storage. The past papers were

organized by the help of software while the rest was created and captured into hard

copies. All local content that was sent to library was organized by classification and latter

shelved on the library shelves. The local content that never made it to the library was

stored in the offices of the departments responsible for its creation without any

organization. Open and Distance Learning Mode department organized the ODLM

materials by classifying them by courses and units.

It was found that KeMU had several incentives in place for local content

creation/capturing such as:

a) Information sources needed to create local content was paid for, that is, online

journals, books, internet and similar others.

b) For teaching staff, articles and books were necessary for promotion. The

university made it a requirement for any lecturer to move to a higher rank.

c) For students, the university through the dean of students' office had established a

research office for guidance on research and project writing.

d) For those who participated in writing ODLM manuals, they were paid by the

university.

The library on its part had no incentives for depositing local content. This can be used to

explain why most of the local content is stored in the creating office/departments. The

library used wiki-based software called KeMUWiki to manage past examination papers

and Koha library system for management of other information materials. This software

89

was free and open source (FOSS). The library was in charge of uploading, organizing and

training users on how to make maximum use of the software. The ICT department had

implemented an e-learning system that lecturers were expected to use to upload lecture

notes for students but training had not been done to both students and the lecturers on

how to use it. It was thus rarely used.

4.5.3 Dissemination of Local Content

The researcher, in order to fulfill the objectives of the study, needed to find out how local

content was disseminated at KeMU. The table below presents the various ways local

content was disseminated in the university.

Table 4.6: Local Content Dissemination

Local content type Dissemination method

Journal Library, departments and selling

ODLM manuals ODLM department gives ODLM

students

Past exam papers KeMUWiki Past papers management

system

Conference papers Creating individuals and departments

Collaboration reports Collaborating departments

Magazines Marketing department and the library

Books Library and authors

Official publications Website, library, administration officers

Research reports Individual departments

Theses and dissertations Library and academic departments

Conference proceedings Research directorate

90

The table above reveals the uncoordinated dissemination of local content to users/KeMU

community. For example, the library is only active in dissemination of past examination

papers wholly and partly for books, theses and dissertations. According to Law et al.

(2005) libraries and librarians involvement in local content is undisputed. Their

involvement is essential in the success of local content management including

dissemination. As can be seen in popularity of local content (Table 4.3), past papers

which were managed by the library wholly had the highest popularity among students

and lecturers at 88% and 100% respectively.

Dissemination is the duty of the library. Other departments cannot successfully

accomplish this role as it is secondary to their primary functions. Local content such as

collaboration reports, research articles and papers were rarely accessed beyond their

departments thus being of little use. Most of useful local content such as research reports,

collaboration reports, conference proceedings and journal articles were in physical form

(hard copies).

4.6 Access, Retrieval and Use of Local Content

The management of local content is not successful until users are able to access and

retrieve the content. The researcher sought to ascertain how students and lecturers

accessed, retrieved and used the various types of local content at the university.

91

4.6.1 Awareness of Local Content among Lecturers and Students at KeMU

Unless one is aware of the existence of a certain information resource, one cannot access,

retrieve and use the resources. Thus, the researcher needed to find out the extent of

awareness among lecturers and students of the various types of local content at KeMU.

The table below shows the level of awareness among the students and lecturers at KeMU.

Table 4.7: Local Content Awareness

Awareness Lecturers Students

Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%)

Journal 26 100 153 52

ODLM Manuals 26 100 38 13

Past papers 26 100 263 89

Collaboration reports 8 30 38 13

Magazines 7 26 109 37

Books 9 36 35 12

Official publications 21 81 186 63

Research reports 19 74 65 22

Theses and

dissertations

26 100 192 65

Conference

proceedings

14 54 109 37

Lecture notes 26 100 215 73

92

From the above data, most lecturers are aware of most local content. The leading local

content which all lecturers were conversant with was the journal, ODLM manuals, past

papers and lecture notes. The least known type of local content by lecturers was

magazines, collaboration reports and books with 7 (26%), 8 (30%) and 9 (36%)

respectively.

For students, the most known type of local content was past papers, lecture notes and

theses and dissertations. These were the majority with 263 (89%), 215 (73%) and 192

(65%) respectively. The least type of local content that students were aware of was

ODLM manuals and collaboration reports with only 38 (13%) of students having

knowledge about.

It is clear that students and lecturers differed in what they were aware of. This was

because both had different information needs and thus needed varying sources of local

content. For example, lecturers were involved in compiling ODLM manuals but only

ODLM students were allowed or needed to use these information materials. Past

examination papers were, however, needed by both (lecturers and students) during

preparation for examinations – lecturers in coming up with exam questions and students

in revising for examinations. This was the reason why past papers was the most known

type of local content. The fact that past papers were also disseminated via electronic

means by the library could also have been a reason for its high level of awareness.

Awareness is very important because users might never bother retrieve and use

information sources that they are not aware of.

93

In conclusion, the type of local content that was most popular with respondents was the

one that was managed by the library through electronic means of dissemination. The type

of local content that the respondents were least aware of was the one that had restricted

access, for example, ODLM manuals and the materials stored at individual lecturer‘s or

department offices thus were not easily accessed. The library therefore was the important

and effective department for making local content known and available for access,

retrieval and use.

4.6.2 Access and Utilization of Local Content

The figure below shows access and use of local content by full-time, part-time and

ODLM students.

94

mode of study

ODLMpart-timefulltime

Me

an

4.0

3.8

3.6

3.4

3.2

3.0

2.8

2.6

2.4

2.2

2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

choice of material

provision of

information

information

accessibility

student projects are

easily accessible

information search

2.6

2.1

2.9

2.2

1.8

2.1

3.7

3.1

3.2

2.6

2.93.1

2.8

1.9

2.1

Figure 4.8: Access and Use of Local Content by Students in Different Modes of Study

The figure above shows the agreement level of students in full-time, part-time and

ODLM modules to the following statement:-

Librarians assist a lot in the choice of information materials to use

The library provides all the information materials needed

It is very easy to access information materials produced by student organizations

Students practicum reports, projects and theses are easily available in the library

The librarians assist in the search of lecture notes needed by users

95

The agreement is in this order: 1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Disagree

and 5 = Strongly Disagree.

From Figure 4.8, it can be deduced that both full-time and part-time mode students

agreed that librarians assisted a lot in the choice of information materials to use (with the

mean of 2.1 and 1.9 respectively) while ODLM students were neutral with a mean of 2.8.

On the second statement, ODLM students seemed to have a higher level of agreement

(2.6) than both full-time (3.1) and part-time (2.9) students.

ODLM disagreed (3.7) with the third statement while part-time and full-time mode

students were neutral with mean of 3.2 and 3.1 respectively. This can be explained by the

fact that ODLM students were rarely in contact with librarians while full-time and part-

time mode students made use of the library frequently. On the fourth statement, part-time

mode students agreement was strongest (1.8), followed by full-time mode (2.1) and

ODLM (2.2). All modes of study confirmed this to be true as they agreed to the

statement.

On the fifth statement, full-time mode of study was neutral (2.9) to the statement while

part-time mode had the highest agreement (2.1) than ODLM (2.6). This can be explained

as full-time mode students attended classes and made their own notes. On other hand,

part-time mode students attended classes in the evenings. This made it hard for them to

attend all the lecturers. ODLM did not attend classes and depended on manuals hence had

no access to lecture notes.

96

4.6.3 Local Content Retrieval

It was necessary to find out how users retrieved local content. Table 4.8 presents the

sources from which learners retrieved local content.

Table 4.8: Sources of Local Content

Sources Lecturers

(%)

Students

(%)

Website

(%)

Library

(%)

Any other

(%)

Journal - - - 35 54

ODLM manuals - - - - 21

Past papers 3 20 60 98 -

Collaboration

reports

- - - - 12

Magazines - - - 20 50

Books - - - 60 33

Official

publications

- - 91 - 21

Research

reports

31 12 - - -

Theses and

dissertations

9 7 - 92 16

Conference

proceedings

27 - - 7 16

Lecture notes 100 43 - - -

97

The data presented reveals that there are different sources of local content for KeMU

community. Lecturers were depended on for lecture notes, research papers, conference

proceedings and research reports. The library was depended on for past papers, theses

and dissertations, books and to a small extent, magazines and journals.

Further investigations revealed that other sources included the teaching departments, the

university‘s research and marketing arms as source for books, magazines, journals,

official publications, collaboration reports, conference proceedings, theses and

dissertations and ODLM manuals. Lecturers indicated that they obtained local content

from their departments as well as from fellow lecturers. They noted that they rarely used

the library for their information needs.

These results show how local content was retrieved in KeMU. Both students and lecturers

rarely depended on the library for local content but more on people sources such as

fellow students and lecturers. The website was only relied on for only official

publications and past papers thus showing that ICTs had not been exploited significantly

for retrieval of local content.

4.6.4 Importance of Local Content

It was necessary to ascertain the importance of local content as this is directly

proportional to its use. Table 4.9 shows the importance levels of local content to students

at KeMU

98

Table 4.9: Importance of Local content (n=293)

Importance Important Not sure Unimportant

Frequency % Frequency % Frequency %

Journal 68 23 148 50 80 27

ODLM Manuals 44 15 121 41 100 34

Past papers 239 81 27 9 0 0

Collaboration reports 15 5 177 60 103 35

Magazines 62 21 189 64 44 15

Books 32 11 207 70 35 12

Official publications 27 9 145 49 124 42

Research reports 47 16 139 47 109 37

Theses and dissertations 227 77 68 23 0 0

Conference proceedings 35 12 159 54 100 34

Lecture notes 257 87 38 13 0 0

All lecturers rated all local content as important.

Lecture notes were the most important type of local content with 257 (87%) of students

considering them important followed by past papers at 239 (81%). The least important

type of local content was official publications with only 27 (9%) of the learners

considering them important. 124 (42%) termed them unimportant while the rest, 145

(49%), were unsure about their importance. Theses and dissertations were also important

attracting an importance of 227 (77%) and notably none of the students considered them

unimportant.

99

This data reveal that lecture notes, past papers and theses and dissertations were the most

important type of local content

4.7 Challenges Experienced in Local Content Management

The management of local content at KeMU met several hurdles. These challenges can be

grouped into the following categories: -

1. Policy related,

2. Technical related and

3. Social related challenges.

4.7.1 Policy Related Challenges

A low number of articles published in the IJPP journal were identified as a major

challenge. The journal, however, was fairly hence it did not attract articles from most

researchers. They opted to publish their work in renowned journals. IJPP also did not

offer any incentive to KeMU community members to encourage them to publish their

work with it.

There lacked detailed policy on research at the institutional level as well as within the

departments. The teaching fraternity did not require its members to publish after a certain

duration (for example, at least one publication per year). Inadequate funding was also a

major challenge and thus researchers and the teaching staff had to depend on financing

from outside KeMU or depend on collaboration with other researchers who could access

100

funding. Further, KeMU did not place priority to research and local content creation,

collection, management and use. The library acquired more external (foreign information

sources) than locally generated content – this was so because of the pricing and the

donation offered by western countries (KeMU development partners). There lacked a

financial policy in the library on the amount of money to be spent on local content

development and management.

The research and extension department/directorate was less than a year old since it was

set up and had not yet developed policies that could be applied as a guideline for other

departments to embrace. This was a big challenge especially to the library as it was

responsible for acquiring, processing and dissemination of information in the university.

Without the policy on research and extension, the university was in a state of limbo.

There was only one journal for publishing research work – the IJPP. This journal

published in all subject fields thus it did not appeal to some researchers in KeMU who

would rather publish their work in a specialized journal.

There was lack of coordination between departments leading to conflicting roles in the

creation, collection, processing, dissemination and use of local content. This was

especially between the library and the teaching departments which insisted on retaining

all the information sources generated by members of the department such as articles

written by lecturers. To add on, ODLM manuals were never availed to the library and

users had to depend on the ODLM department. All this was caused by the lack of a local

content management policy.

101

Copyright challenge: This affected the papers and published work of the lecturers.

Although authors were willing to give their works as local content, the publishers had to

be consulted first. The copyright laws were not well understood by many lecturers and

this was a stumbling block in having their content made available for use within KeMU.

4.7.2 Technical Related Challenges

Inadequate application of ICTs in the management of local content in KeMU was cited as

a stumbling block. The available journal – IJPP – was published in hardcopy. This

implied more costs and even more difficulty in marketing it especially in the developed

countries. Apart from KeMU website and the library website, other departments did not

have any online presence for their content. This meant most local content remained in

print and thereby largely unknown. The ICT department concentrated more on other

application areas in the university such as students‘ recruitment and management,

examinations and human resources rather than the library and information management

platforms. The library had tried and had in place a past papers managements system

while the rest of local content was not catered for in any online platform.

Compatibility of both software and hardware was a challenge, too. This came about as a

result of the existing software and hardware implying that new systems for local content

management had to be approved by ICT in order to be compatible with other systems

which the university was already using.

102

Information/data security: This was a serious challenge as lecturers, librarians and

students perceived ICTs as insecure. This resulted in failure to allow some local content

to be disseminated via the ICTs such as ODLM manuals and lecture notes.

4.7.3 Social Related Challenges

There existed a negative attitude to local content at KeMU, especially by the students.

Most of the students depended on foreign content to achieve their academic goals. This

was the same in the library management. The library collection had more foreign

published information materials than those published locally. The fact that the library did

not put emphasis on collection, processing and dissemination of local content could have

led to the negative attitude towards local content as it was unavailable thus it could not be

used.

Copyright. The owners/creators of local content held it close to their hearts and did not

want to lose ownership of their work. Those who collaborated with other organizations

felt that it was their own hard work and KeMU did little to assist them thus reluctant to

share their work.

As noted by Joan Giesecke (2011), populating institutional repositories is a major

challenge that faces all organizations in trying to manage their locally generated content.

Local content management as opposed to institutional repositories envisions collection of

all types of relevant information materials, academic or otherwise, a challenge that is

103

affecting local content management in KeMU. The policy related challenges show that

the management has not done its part in developing guidelines that can create a

framework that could guide the activities in local content management.

4.8 Chapter Summary

The response rate of students was impressive, 293(79%). Only 26(53%) of lecturers were

interviewed. All librarians and deans/heads of programmes sampled and informants were

interviewed. The data revealed that most students 266(91%) were undergraduates while

most lecturers 21(81%) had a masters qualification. The study has established eight types

of local content available at KeMU and past papers being the most popular with

260(88%) of students and all lecturers finding them popular while research proceedings

being the least known with 33(11%) popularity rating among the learners. This chapter

has also established how local content is identified, processed, disseminated, accessed,

retrieved and used in KeMU. The study has identified the challenges faced in the

management of local content as policy, technical and social related.

104

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF MAJOR FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the summary of the major findings, conclusion and

recommendations. The study focused on: how local content created at KeMU was

collected, processed and disseminated; how clients accessed, retrieved and used local

content; and the challenges experienced in local content management. The study has also

developed a framework for efficient and effective local content management in KeMU.

5.2 Summary of Major Findings

The study sought to accomplish the following objectives:

1. To establish the types of local content created at KeMU.

2. To find out how local content is captured, processed and disseminated at

KeMU.

3. To find out how clients access, retrieve and use local content at KeMU.

4. To establish the challenges experienced in management of local content at

KeMU.

5. To make recommendations and develop a framework for managing local

content at KeMU.

105

All the above objectives were met and the findings are presented as follows:-

5.2.1 Types of Local Content at KeMU

The study has established the following as the types of local content at the university.

1. Lecture notes: These are information materials that lecturers develop to assist

them in teaching. They are made available orally, on white board, issued out as

handouts, or disseminated via class group emails or to individual student emails.

Some lecture notes are also availed to students through the e-learning system.

2. Journals published by KeMU: The study has found out that KeMU publishes

one journal titled ―International Journal of Professional Practice‖ (IJPP). This

journal accepts papers from within and without KeMU. Most of the papers are,

however, from the KeMU fraternity and thus it is considered to form part of local

content.

3. Research papers: KeMU staffs were involved in research and occasionally they

do produce research papers. These documents are sometimes published by other

journals apart from the IJPP. The journal‘s content comprises local content, too.

4. Theses and practicum reports: These are mainly produced by students. Theses

at master‘s degree level, project reports at bachelor‘s level while practicum

reports are generated by the students after industrial attachment. These also

populate the local content repository as they are authored by members of KeMU

community.

5. Magazines published by KeMU: The University used to publish a magazine

titled ―Bits and Bytes‖ which highlighted current issues within the institution.

106

There lacks no avenue for such news worthy issues to be published apart from the

website.

6. KeMU websites: KeMU has two websites – KeMU main and KeMU library

website. The main website presents information on the University in general and

has links to other sub-sites such as e-learning, students‘ management system and

the library website. Library website has information about the library and links to

online information resources such as e-books, and e-journals. News, pictures and

announcements are also made on the website.

7. Official publications by KeMU: There are several publications such as

brochures, news releases, adverts, calendars and timetables. All these form part of

local content in the university.

8. Books authored by lecturers: There are several books authored by the teaching

staff. Although not published by KeMU, they comprise local content because they

were written by members of KeMU community.

9. ODLM manuals: These are information materials written to assist the students in

distance learning mode. They constitute local content because they are

commissioned by KeMU. Every course that is offered on ODLM has a study

manual.

10. KeMUSO Publication: Through various clubs, the student organization had

created a lot of content in form of posters, announcements, notices, pictures and

webpages. These, too, comprised local content.

107

11. Past examination papers: All past papers are local content and are managed by

the wiki-based past papers management system. They are availed for use via the

library website.

The above types of local content fit the definition given by Crow (2002) ―scholarly

produced, submitted or sponsored by an institutions‘ faculty (and optionally students) or

other agents, non-ephemeral, and licensable in perpetuity.‖ These types of local content

thus satisfy the argument that local content is that ―information which is from a

community and for that community‖.

The study also found out other content such as online journals and e-books which include

content that is relevant for KeMU but not from the university itself. The research has also

revealed that local content is a part of information resources used by KeMU community

among other resources.

The study found out that KeMU lacked a local content policy that had a guiding

definition of what comprises local content. The library had a section for theses and

research projects but was not entirely identified as local content. The past examination

papers management system was not designated as local content in particular but rather as

past exam papers.

KeMU library did not have mechanisms to assist in determining what local content was

and what did not comprise local content. The library collected, processed and

108

disseminated theses, research projects and past papers. Other local content types were

managed by the source departments or individuals.

5.2.2 Collection, Processing and Dissemination of Local Content

The management of local content in KeMU involved three steps; collection, processing

and dissemination.

Local Content Capture/Collection

The study found out that the local content was captured/collected in varying ways:

1. Theses and dissertations: These were deposited in the library by departments,

although there was no written policy on deposit. This is an indication that

teaching departments had identified the library as the central source of

information for students and they were making good use of it. This ought to have

been the duty of the library. Only Business and Economics department deposited

selected theses and research reports with the library.

2. Journals, magazines and KeMU publications: Copies of these materials were

given to the library for the purposes of marketing, informing and creating

awareness. These were not given as collections belonging to the library. This led

to mismanagement of the content as it never became library‘s property. Journals

were given for display by the publishers because they were meant for sale.

Magazines and KeMU publications were placed at the entrance for students and

109

other users to pick. The library had not taken as its role to actively collect this

type of local content.

3. Past Papers: The library collected past papers from the university‘s examination

department in soft copy as soon as students sat for the papers. There wasn‘t a

policy on this and the librarian in charge got the soft copies through informal

agreement terms with the university examination department. There were no

guidelines to follow on how this was done and some course units were missing

from the collection, some had missing passwords while others were not even

exam papers but a list of questions for revision. It was extremely hard to get past

papers from other campuses due to lack of written guidelines.

4. Website content: The library had no policy on local content published on KeMU

official websites and other unofficial ones like various Facebook pages for

different student organizations and blogs by staffs and students. The library,

however, had provided a link on the library website for the official KeMU website

-- www.kemu.ac.ke

The study found out that KeMU library failed to collect/capture other local content types

such as:-

Graduation ceremony videos and pictures,

Student organization‘s constitutions and policies,

Music, poems, and other creative works by students and staff,

KeMU policies, yearbooks, university calendar and time tables,

Open and distance learning manuals, and

110

Staff and students‘ blogs and students‘ organization‘s Facebook pages.

The findings reveal that KeMU library did not participate fully in the collection of local

content availed at KeMU. This clearly shows that there is a need for policies and

guidelines on how this collection should be done.

Local Content Processing

Past examination papers were actively collected by the library. Their management was as

follows:-

1. Collection from exam department in a flash disc

2. Downloaded to a computer desktop assigned to the librarian in charge

3. Uploading onto the past examination paper‘s management system one-by-one

after scanning for viruses, checking whether they needed passwords to open and

verifying whether they are in a compliant format.

4. The document‘s names were set in a manner such that the file name was the

course code of the unit followed by its title, the semester it was examined and the

year the paper was done.

5. For the papers which did not have formula, equations, tables and special

characters, they were uploaded by copying the content and pasting it on the past

papers system so that the final format could be read via a web browser rather than

external programs. This made the past papers full-text searchable.

6. As soon as the past papers were uploaded, they could be downloaded by users.

7. This past papers system gave reports on the use, collection, and state of past

papers.

111

Theses and dissertations were received by the library and the following steps were

followed:-

1. Teaching departments deposited selected theses and research projects after

graduation every year.

2. The library had developed an in-house classification scheme for the scholarly

documents. This made sure that they were classified by the department and then

by subject.

3. They were accessioned and checked for physical defects such as missing or torn

pages and omitted content of the research title.

4. They were then classified and given a class number.

5. They were entered into the library information management system

6. They were then shelved on a section of the library that has been set aside for

them. This made them easy to find and the in-house system made it simple for

students to browse.

Local Content Dissemination

Past paper management system was used to disseminate the local content. This system

was online but only accessible via the local area network and through Wide Area

Network for campuses. This meant that users could not access them from the comfort of

their homes or office desks. This system, however, had been successful in access and

retrieval of past papers as one document could be accessed at the same time by multiple

users. It was also possible to know which past papers were missing as users reported of

the course unit they could not get in the system. The system was easy to use as it had a

112

friendly search interface and users could choose to either read online, download or print

the past examination paper. Instructions on how to search were on the home page. Theses

and dissertation were shelved on their own section which made their access simple.

Browsing was equally easy as they were according to departments such as health,

business and computer science and then by subject. This was important as users‘

searching behavior was primarily through source department.

Journals, Magazines and KeMU publications were not processed by the library at all.

Journals were placed on display shelves and when users wanted to read, they were

advised to purchase them from the research and extension directorate offices. Magazines

and KeMU publications were placed on the circulation desk and users picked one for

their information.

Strategies for Collecting, Processing and Disseminating Local Content

The type of local content that was collected, processed and disseminated actively is past

papers, theses and research reports. KeMU library lacked special strategies for theses and

research projects except that there was a thesis shelving section and electronic

information management system for past papers. There were no written policies in place

for guiding librarians on collection, processing and dissemination of local content.

The study found out the following strategies for theses and research reports and past

papers.

113

Theses and research reports:-

1. They were availed to the library by teaching department after selection.

2. Librarians accessioned and classified them by subject and entered their

records into the library management system.

3. The documents were shelved in the thesis section.

4. Users were not allowed to borrow the materials for use outside the library

but they could use them within the reading areas.

Strategies for past papers:-

a. The librarian responsible for the materials requested for soft copies of past

papers from the examination department through the university librarian

b. The past papers were saved in the librarian‘s computer and who then

verified that they were usable, making sure that they did not have

passwords and the format was readable.

c. They were converted into the wikitext format for uploading to the past

papers management system.

d. Users were allowed to access the system for search, print, download and

share past papers among themselves.

Other types of local content established by the study were not considered by the library

and thus did not have strategies to manage them. The library merely offered a service to

other departments, for example, journals, magazines and KeMU publications were

availed to the library for marketing to users and not as library collections. The

departments themselves did not have strategies in place for managing the content they

created.

114

5.2.3 Access, Retrieval and Use of Local Content

The study found out that clients at KeMU were made up of two groups, staff and

students. Among staff, there were the teaching and non-teaching personnel. Of the

teaching staff, there were part-time and full-time lecturers. Students were in full-time,

part-time, weekend-intensive and ODLM modes. The mode of study, time spent in

KeMU and academic level affected the use of local content.

However, the use of local content was minimal as compared to that of foreign content.

Students mostly used lecture notes, theses and practicum reports, books and journals

published by lecturers and other staff. Local content use took a smaller share compared

with external content. The Internet was the most used source of information and was the

reason for more access to foreign content. The access, retrieval and use of local content

were based on awareness of the information material‘s existence. Very few students are

aware of the available local content. Lecturers had authored books and articles that were

published but only a few learners were conversant with their existence.

The library on its part did not play a major role in creating awareness apart from

displaying journals, magazines and KeMU publications. The library also did not play a

proactive role in collection and capture of all local content. There was no evidence that

the library encouraged creation of local content except for the provision of information

materials. The study also established that retrieval of local content was dependent on

whether the material sought is found. The library was depended upon for books,

magazines, KeMU publications, and theses and research reports while past papers and

115

electronic articles were sourced from the library website. Lecturers were depended upon

for lecture notes.

Whereas the library was the department mandated to collect, manage and disseminate

information, conventionally, it should have been the source of all local content. However,

lecture notes, student‘s compositions such as music, pictures, art, and poems were not

availed in the library. This was an indicator that the library had underachieved in its

mandate. This left the users depending on other information sources such as lecturers,

websites, the Internet and other students for information. It is important to note that

lecturers were the source of lecture notes but it is not in their role to organize, preserve

and disseminate this information because they lack training to carry out such a function,

but librarians have.

5.2.4 Local Content Management Challenges

The study found out the following challenges:-

1. Non-commitment to research: Although there were plans to have in place

directorates of research and extension and that of post-graduate studies, KeMU

did not have a coordinated effort to encourage research within the university.

Every department and individual had their own ways and methods of scouting for

conferences to present papers, journals to publish in and soliciting funding to

conduct research. Even looking for partnerships to conduct research was the

prerogative of individual scholars.

116

2. Teaching staff were overloaded with work: The teaching staff were overloaded

with class work such that time for research was not found at all. Lecturers took the

full teaching loads and still scouted for more part-time assignments within KeMU

or neighboring universities. This reduced the time the lecturers dedicated for

research. The lack of well organized class notes in the library was as a result of

overloading seeing lecturers opt to lecture without notes.As a consequence, the

quality of teaching was impaired and the output for individual lecturers was

muted.

3. Financial challenges: There was inadequate funding by the University for

research. The newly-formed directorate of research and extension did not have

enough funds. This was, however, not used because most of the staff were not

aware of the criterion used for one to get funding. Most of the researchers and

teaching staff scouted for financing from external bodies such as the government,

NGOs or partners with reliable sources of money to undertake studies by

collaboration. In a nutshell, establishing the directorate for research was a good

gesture but its policies needed to be set in consultation with all departments.

4. Publicity/creating awareness for local content: The library department did not

do enough to create awareness of the available local content. The library had past

papers and journals but these were not listed on the OPAC or on display shelves

for patrons to know of their existence. The past papers are available online but

there lacked marketing tools such as posters, online adverts on KeMU websites,

email notifications for both staff and students, PowerPoint presentations in

117

seminars and workshops on the available local content materials, how to access

and use them.

Other departments that hosted local content did not let the library know neither

the type, volume nor the availability of the materials. Consequently, this remained

uncollected and inaccessible. The lecturers provided lecture notes to their students

in class but made no extra effort to avail the same to those who could not make it

to class; this left the affected students with no option but to depend on their

colleagues for lecture notes.

ODLM manuals were issued to students during registration. The library did not

get any of the study manuals for use by patrons. This left the students with only

one source for key documents – the ODLM department. This reduced their

accessibility as the ODLM department did not open during weekends and in the

evenings while the library opened every day between 8.00am and 9.00pm,

Saturdays (8.00am – 5.00pm) and Sundays (11.00am – 4.00pm). The library was

the best place for dissemination of such content but it did not get the opportunity

to do so.

5. Publishing avenues: There was lack of a variety of journals published by KeMU.

This led to non-publishing of most locally-produced research, projects, seminars

and presented workshop papers. The only journal, the IJPP, was not able to

accommodate all the written papers.

There existed only one official magazine (Bits and Bites) but it has since folded.

At the time the study was conducted, there was no magazine to publish such items

118

as poems, stories, features, news and pictures by students and the university

employees.

The lack of a variety of publishing platforms meant that most locally-created

content could not be available for collection, organizing and dissemination

leading to dimming the visibility of KeMU internationally.

KeMU scholars who could publish on the Internet did so using personal blogs or

Facebook pages but again this was not collected, collated and organized. Locating

it on the web was difficult not only for the library staff but also for the patrons.

6. Lack of an Institutional repository: KeMU did not have an institutional

repository for locally-created information materials. It‘s only the university

library that had a collection of past papers and a management system for them.

This system did not contain any other local content such as presentations,

pictures, class notes, teaching videos and student‘s creative works such as

photography, writings or the learners‘ organization‘s reports.

Institutional repository acts like a collection of all locally-produced or adapted

content by members of the institution thereby presenting the knowledge acquired

by an organization in general. Therefore, in its absence, there lacked a way of

estimating how the knowledge fund generated by KeMU community had grown

over the years.

7. Lack of centralized institutional policy on local content: KeMU did not have

an institutional policy on local content management. This resulted in various

departments taking the role of collecting, creating, processing, disseminating and

119

using local content without any institutional guiding principles. The information

materials produced from collaboration between individuals and departments with

other institutions was either stored in the concerned departments or individual

staff offices or could not be located at all.

As a result, the library was not in a position to tell the total number of papers

produced by individual lecturers, departments or students due to lack of

guidelines on how this content could be availed to the library. Although the

departments could create and collect local content, they were not able to process

and disseminated it effectively and efficiently as the library could.

5.3 Conclusion

The study has established that lecture notes, KeMU publications, research papers,

research proceedings, research reports, theses and practicum reports, past examination

papers, and ODLM manuals as the types of local content available in KeMU. Among

these, past exam papers were the most popular, highly sought and widely used. The least

used type of local content was research proceedings. Only past papers were fully

managed by the library. Theses and dissertations were partly managed by the library

while ODLM manuals were fully managed by the ODLM department.

Only two types of local content were actively captured, processed and disseminated by

the library – past papers, theses and dissertations. Past papers was the best managed type

of local content at KeMU. There was no evidence that the library encouraged creation of

local content.

120

Clients at KeMU were made up of teaching and non-teaching staff, and full-time, part-

time, weekend-intensive and ODLM mode students. The teaching staff included part-time

and full-time lecturers. The mode of study, time spent in KeMU, academic level and

qualification of staff had a direct bearing on the use of local content. However, the use of

local content was minimal as compared to foreign content.

The access, retrieval and use of local content depended on awareness of its existence.

Very few students were aware of the available local content. The library on its part did

not play a major role in creating awareness of local content. Whereas the library was the

department mandated to collect, manage and disseminate information, conventionally, it

should have been the source of all local content – academic an non-academic. This was

an indicator that the library had failed in its core mandate of collecting processing and

availing information to users.

The challenges that management of local content in KeMU experienced were policy

related, technical and social. Among the policy-based challenges were poor commitments

to research, inadequate funding, duplication and/or conflicting roles within and among

the university departments. Among the technical related challenges were, inadequate use

of ICTs, neglect of local content by the ICT department, existence of incompatible

software as well as data insecurity. Social related challenges included, negative attitude to

local content at KeMU.

121

The study developed a framework for efficient and effective local content management in

KeMU. This framework takes into consideration the findings and seeks to enhance local

content management at the university. The framework considers all KeMU community

members and defines their roles in local content management.

5.4 Recommendations

The study has come up with the following recommendations as derived from the findings

of the study.

5.4.1 Develop Local Content Policy

The study recommends a local content policy be developed given that there were

undocumented procedures, adhoc collection methods and uncoordinated management of

various types of local content at KeMU, the study established that there was no

institutional policy on local content management. This led to duplication and conflict of

roles, neglected types of local content, inaccessible, unaccounted for and unused but

important local content.

The local content policy should be developed by a Local Content Policy Committee. The

team should be chaired by the librarian and its members should be drawn from all the

teaching, administration and students‘ departments. This initiative would see all

stakeholders‘ opinions, needs, requirements and even grievances accommodated during

policy formulation.

122

5.4.2 Definition of Local Content

The Local Content Committee needs to develop a working definition of local content that

will guide on the creation/collection, management/organization and use/access of the

materials. Definition is crucial as it will determine what would be regarded as local

content and what would not fit in that constituency of knowledge. This definition needs

to be inclusive (include all local content) and exclusive (exclude all non-local content).

The committee needs to note some content that may be both local although the source

could be external. The policy should also list the type of content that should comprise the

local content. File formats, content and context, authors, subjects, academic level,

publishing level, and purpose, creativity, innovativeness and research content should be

considered. This is because the content will need to be useful and also show the output of

the university to the international community.

The study recommends a working definition of local content to the committee as: ―the

expression of all knowledge that has been gained, transformed, assimilated, adapted and

owned by individual or a group of individuals who comprise the KeMU community.‖

5.4.3 Determine the Procedures

The study recommends that the local content committee that will be set up should

develop procedures which would be used in content creation/collection,

management/organization, and use/access. These procedures would be clearly defined

and individuals or departments would be given responsibilities over them. This would

eliminate conflicting roles and enhance efficiency of local content collection/creation,

processing and use within KeMU.

123

In this regard, study recommends that the library takes the leading role in coordinating

the creation, collection, organization, retrieval and use of local content. On its part, the

ICT department should be allocated the role of providing hardware and software and

training the KeMU community on how to use local content. All teaching and research

departments should be treated as creators and users of local content.

5.4.4 Incentives Provision

Creators and users of local content should be provided with incentives. This will be

important in the success of local content management because they would see that they

own the project and they are beneficiaries as well. KeMU would also need to know how

it benefits from management of local content as well as the departments, user groups and

individuals.

Lack of incentives was a major hindrance on lecturers‘ willingness to hand over their

work for access in the library. The study recommends that creators be recognized by

having their names as the copyright owners of the work. By assuring that their creations

would be availed freely online continuously, providing training on how to compose

research, write, publish and market their work and basing promotions to staff on content

created would see them gain in monetary terms. With respect to users, the study

recommends that they get training on the use of local content so that they appreciate its

importance. The university could also award the users via a competition on materials

used.

124

5.4.5 Responsibilities of Departments

All departments should have their responsibilities outlined. This should include the

departments that will be created in future. The study recommends that the library be

allocated the responsibility of managing and organizing the local content while research,

postgraduate and teaching departments should be in charge of creation/collection and

submission of local content materials to the library. On its part, the student community

would be users as well as creators of content.

The ICT department would be responsible for provision, maintenance and update of

relevant software and hardware. Other roles such as marketing and training users should

be allocated to both library and teaching departments while funding and staffing should

be left the university administration. The recommendation is that local content

management can be placed under the library so that the librarians appoint the team that

would be in charge. Those appointed will, however, need to be trained on their new

responsibilities.

5.4.6 Funding and Staffing

The study recommends that the local content committee develops a budget to meet its

roles. This budget should determine the sources of funding and indicate how the project

would become sustainable. The library should bare most of the budget as its duty is to

manage information in KeMU. The cost of hardware and software should be covered by

the ICT department while the university administration should shoulder the cost of

staffing and staff development/training. The staffing of local content management arm

125

should be outlined in the local content policy. This should include the required academic

qualification as well as needed work experience, the number of required employees and

under which department they fall in. Remuneration and responsibilities of these workers

should be outlined as well.

5.4.7 Training of users

The study recommends that users of local content get training because the survey found

out that most types of available local content was underutilized. The users did not

participate in its collection/creation, processing, dissemination and use. Most of the users

were not aware of other types of local content apart from past papers and theses and

dissertations. The library did not indicate that it offered any training to users on how to

participate in local content management.

This gap should be filled. The library has a mandate to acquire process and disseminate

information resources in KeMU and therefore should take this role. Planning, design and

development of training programme should be developed. The library should train the

librarians on local content; its importance, existence, its benefits, its collection/creation,

its processing, dissemination and use. Issues such as copyright, definition, formats and

ownership should also be included in the schooling.

126

Once they have the skills, the librarians should become trainers of users. This would

significantly increase the use of local content as many patrons would acquire the skills.

Evaluation after training is recommended to help understand whether the skills taught

have been grasped. The types of local content that increase/reduce in quantity, quality

and use will show the impact.

5.4.8 Awareness Creation

The study established that there was a little awareness on the available local content. This

had a direct bearing on the reduced use of local content materials. This survey therefore

recommends that the team managing local content steps up awareness campaign. The

library should spearhead this drive in collaboration with other departments which are

both sources and users of local content. Traditionally, KeMU library has been marketing

library information resources and services within and without.

This cannot be the case for local content at KeMU as users may never visit the library

while at the same time; the local content can be accessed remotely for example past

papers. It is the considered view of this study that KeMU must use social media

platforms, the library website besides students and staff meetings to make known not just

the availability of local materials but also the importance of local content to target

audiences.

127

5.4.9 Proposed Framework

The proposed framework presents local content management as three-part process that

starts from:-

1. Creation/collection through;

2. Management (collation, collection, processing and dissemination) and finally

3. Use/access of local content.

Figure 5.1 shows the proposed framework for efficient and effective local content

management in KeMU.

128

Figure 5.1: The Proposed Local Content Management Framework for KeMU

Access/use

Player: users

Activities: access, online reading,

downloading sharing, linking,

commenting, tagging, recommending.

Management/organization

Player: Librarians

Activities: collection, collating,

organization, repackaging,

cataloging ,indexing, classifying,

shelving.

Creation/adoption

Player: Creators/submitters

Activities: submitting,

depositing, emailing content,

linking new content, uploading.

Content: meeting, presentations,

past papers, lecture notes. Thesis,

projects, reports, pre-prints

Social, policy and technical issues

129

The framework recognizes key players, the activities for each part and presents local

content management as a spiral continuum that grows in creation/collection, management

and access/use. The continuum starts with creation/collection of local content that is then

collected, collated and organized into repository/storage and finally availed for access

and use. The framework foresees that with accessibility and use of local content, more

content is created/collected leading to the management of increased volume of local

content thus the outward expansion of the spiral.

5.4.9.1 Creation/Collection

This part presents the creation or collection of local content. Local content can be

collected such as research reports, books published by KeMU, magazines, journals,

yearbooks, project and practicum reports, theses and dissertations, lecture notes, past

papers, presentations, meetings, websites, blogs, poems, pictures videos etc. as long as

they have been created by members of KeMU community. Other content can be adopted

such as links within blogs, references in research papers and supporting documents for

project or practicum reports. Local content can be created or collected in print or digital

formats.

Activities in this part include: publishing, updating blogs, websites updates, uploading

pictures and videos to sites, submitting research, project or practicum reports to

departments, preparation of lecture notes, setting examination papers and so on. The

major player in this part is the creator/submitter. This could be individuals, departments,

collaboration or group of persons or special offices. The work presented need not belong

130

to the submitter but must be created/collected or adapted by a member of the KeMU

community.

5.4.9.2 Management

Management part presents the collection of the local content, collation, organizing and

dissemination for the purposes of efficient and effective search and retrieval. The major

players in this part are the librarians. They can collect both digital and print local content.

This can be made possible by local content management system where they request

creators/submitters to physically deliver, email or direct them to local content site via

online links. For print content, librarians can encourage tendering of materials in the

library or visit creating departments to collect local content. Organizing and collation can

be done by applying cataloguing, indexing and classification rules just like they do with

any other information materials like books.

5.4.9.3 Use/Access

Users are the major players in this part; in KeMU, users comprise students and the

university employees. Digital local content can be accessed via local content management

system or through the OPAC or library website. Depending on features of the local

content management systems, users are able to download, link, read online, copy, print,

share, tag, comment or recommend local content to other users. For print materials of

local content, users will be required to physically search the OPAC and locate the

materials from the shelves. Depending on library rules, they may be allowed to borrow or

make copies of the information materials.

131

5.4.9.4 The Environment

The model brings out three major issues in the environment for local content

management. These are:

a) Technological issues

b) Social issues

c) Policy issues

Technological issues: They include software, hardware, Internet and computer access,

technological knowhow, support for both users and administrators, compatibility issues,

accessibility, security, user rights and platform versions.

Social issues: These include user privacy, beliefs, benefits, individual vs. community

ownership, equity in participation, training among similar others.

Policy issues: Policy issues include funding, staffing, responsibilities of participants and

players, content type, procedures, rules and responsibilities, copyright, empowerment,

training and marketing.

5.4.10 Suggestion for Further Studies

This study was limited to local content management in KeMU and thus would suggest

further research be undertaken to cover:-

1. Local content management in public universities in Kenya.

2. Local content management in research institutions in Kenya.

132

REFERENCES

Allard, S., Mack, T.R. & Feltner-Reichert, M. (2005). The Librarian‘s Role in

Institutional Repositories: A Content Analysis of the Literature. Reference

Services Review, 33(3), 325-336.

Atnafu, S. (2005). Local Content and Localization: The Ethiopian Case. Retrieved

August 15, 2009 from

http://www.uneca.org/eca_programmes/it_for_development/events/accra/African

Languages/ATFANU_Local%20Content%20Development-WSIS-3.ppt

Badat, S. (2009). The Role of Higher Education in Society: Valuing Higher Education.

Retrieved on January 15th,

2013 from http://eprints.ru.ac.za/1502/1/badat_hers.pdf

Ballantyne, P. (2002). Collecting and Propagating Local Development Content:

Synthesis and Conclusions. Research report submitted to IICD

Bruegge, C. et al. (2011). The Relationship Between Local Content, Internet

Development and Access Prices. The Internet Society. Retrieved January 12th

2013 from

http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CI/CI/pdf/local_conte

nt_study.pdf

Budapest Open Access Initiative (2002) Retrieved October 8th

2014 from

http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read

Businessdictionary.com (2013). Retrieved 21st October 2013 from

(http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/management.html#ixzz2RMCnpz

qC.

Cohen, S., & Schmidle, D. (2007). Creating a Multipurpose Digital Institutional

Repository. OCLC Systems and Services: International Digital Library

Perspectives, 23(3), 287-296.

Conway, P. (2008). Modeling the Digital Content Landscape in Universities. Library Hi

Tech, 26(3), 342-354.

Crow, R. (2002a). The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper.

Washington, DC: SPARC.

Crow, R. (2002b). SPARC Institutional Repository Checklist & Resource Guide.

Washington, D.C.: The Scholarly Publishing & Academic Resources Coalition.

Devakos, R. (2006). Towards User Responsive Institutional Repositories: A Case Study.

Library Hi Tech 24(2), 173-182.

133

Genoni, P. (2004). Content in Institutional Repositories: A Collection Management Issue.

Library Management, 25(6-7), 300-306.

Giesecke, J. (2011). Institutional Repositories: Keys to Success. Journal of Library

Administration, 51, 5-6.

Hancock, B. (1998). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. U.K.: Trent Focus.

Jenkins, B., Breakstone, E. & Hixson, C. (2005). Content in, Content out: The Dual Roles

of the Reference Librarian in Institutional Repositories. Reference Services

Review, 33(3), 312-324. Retrieved May 31st 2011 from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00907320510611348.

Kasomo, D. (2007). Research Methods in Humanities and Education. Eldoret, Kenya:

Zapf Chancery.

KeMU, (2008). Kenya Methodist University: Charting a Path to the Future – Strategic

Plan 2008 – 2012. KeMU, Kenya.

Khan, A.W. (2003). Promoting Local Content. (Paper presented at WSIS PrepCom II:

Multi-stakeholder Roundtable No.2). Retrieved August 21, 2009 from

http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/pc2/roundtables/rt2/khan.pdf.

KLISC, (2012). Electronic Resource Databases. Retrieved January 12, 2013 from

http://www.klisc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=56&Item

id=74.

Kothari, C.R. (2004). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi: New

Age International.

Law, et al. (2005). Developing a National Information Strategy in Scotland. Cadernos de

Biblioteconomia, Arquivística e Documentação, 1, 49-53. Retrieved October 10th

2014 from http://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/1969/1/strathprints001969.pdf.

Levy, C. M. (2007, May). Benefits of Providing Equal Access to Global and Local

Content. Retrieved June 2, 2010 from http://www.socinfo.com/carlos-miranda-

levy/benefits-providing-equal-access-global-and-local-content.

Lynch, C. A. (2003, February). Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for

Scholarship in the Digital Age. ARL Bimonthly Report, ARL 226, 1-6.

Merriam-Webster Capture. Retrieved January 2, 2013 from http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/capture?show=0&t=1366783172.

134

Mora, M. (2010, March 16). Quantitative Vs. Qualitative Research – When to Use Which.

Retrieved January 12, 2013 from http://www.surveygizmo.com/survey-

blog/quantitative-qualitative-research/

Powell, R. R. and Connaway, L. S. (2004). Basic Research Methods for Librarians. 4th

ed. Westport, Conn. Libraries Unlimited.

Qualitative vs Quantitative Research, (n.d.). Retrieved January 12, 2013 from

http://www.snapsurveys.com/techadvqualquant.shtml

Reeves, S., Hagen, J., and Jewell, C. (2006). Unlocking scholarly access: ETDs,

institutional repositories and creators: Highlights of ETD 2006, the 9th

International Symposium on Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Library Hi Tech

News, 23(7), 12-15.

Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and

Practitioner-Researchers 2nd

ed. U.K.: Blackwell.

Seidel, J. V. (1998). Qualitative Data Analysis. Retrieved September 25, 2009 from

http://www.scribd.com/doc/7129360/Seidel-1998-Qualitative-Data-Analysis

Tjiek, L.T., (2005). DesaInformasi: Local Content Global Reach. (Research paper

presented at the 2005 seminar of the International Council on Achieves – East

Lansing, MI – U.S.A. September 6-9, 2005). Retrieved July 14, 2009 from

http://www.archives.msu.edu/icasuv/papers/DesaInformasi.pdf.

UNESCO, (n.d.). The Need for Local Content. Retrieved January 12, 2013 from

http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-

URL_ID=5463&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

University of Western Sydney Library, (n.d.). Literature Review. Retrieved May 22, 2013

from

http://library.uws.edu.au/infoGathering.php?case=litReview&s=litImportance

Warren, R. (2001). Information Architects and Their Central Role in Content

Management. Bulletin of the American Society for Information science and

Technology, 28(1). Retrieved March 21, 2010 from

<http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Oct-01/warren.html>

Weber, R. (2004). The Rhetoric of Positivism Versus Interpretivism: A Personal View.

MIS Quarterly, 28(1), iii-xii.

Wikipedia.org, (2013). Content (media) retrieved January 12, 2013 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_(media)

135

Yearwood-Jackman, S. (2009). Repository Management: The Liverpool Experience.

(Gregynog Colloquium, June 10, 2009).

Yu, H. (2005). Content and Workflow Management for Library Web Sites: Case Studies.

Hershey: Information Science Publishing.

136

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: QUESTIONNAIRE FOR STUDENTS

((√) tick as appropriate)

Section A: Bio Data

1. Which mode of study are you enrolled in?

Full-time Part-time Weekend-intensive

Open and distance learning

2. Which academic level are you in?

Undergraduate Masters PhD

3. How long have you studied in KeMU? ………………… trimesters (indicate

number of trimesters)

Section B:

1. Which information materials are you likely to use to write your assignment?

a. Lecture notes

b. Books written by your lecturers

c. Books bought by the library

d. Journals published by KeMU

e. Journals published by other publishers

f. Research papers

g. Research proceedings

h. Research reports

i. Theses and practicum reports by KeMU students

j. Magazines published by KeMU

137

k. University publications/ official documents e.g. university calendars

l. Any other

……………………………………………………………………

2. Which information materials are you likely to use to write your final project?

a. Lecture notes

b. Books written by your lecturers

c. Books bought by the library

d. Journals published by KeMU

e. Journals published by other publishers

f. Research papers

g. Research proceedings

h. Research reports

i. Theses and practicum reports by KeMU students

j. Magazines published by KeMU

k. University publications/ official documents e.g. university calendars

l. Any other ………………………………………………………………..

138

3. Where do you get access to the following information materials? (Tick where

appropriate)

Information

material

lecturer other

students

KeMU

website

library Any other source (please

specify)

Lecture notes

Past exam papers

Books published

by KeMU

Journals Published

by KeMU

Magazines

published by

KeMU

Information

materials

published by

student

organizations/socie

ties/clubs etc

Theses and

dissertations by

KeMU students

Articles written by

KeMU

staff/students

139

4. How important are the following information materials to your study at KeMU?

(tick where appropriate)

Information material Very

important

important Not

sure

Unimportant Very

unimportant

Lecture notes

Past exam papers

Books published by

KeMU

Journals Published by

KeMU

Magazines published by

KeMU

Information materials

published by student

organizations/societies/clu

bs etc

Theses and dissertations

by KeMU students

Articles written by KeMU

staff/students

140

5. How do you search for past examination papers?

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

6. List the books you know written by lecturers at KeMU

a. ………………………………………………………………………………

b. ………………………………………………………………………………

c. ………………………………………………………………………………

d. ………………………………………………………………………………

7. List the journals you know published by KeMU?

a. ………………………………………………………………………………

b. ………………………………………………………………………………

c. ………………………………………………………………………………

d. ………………………………………………………………………………

8. List articles published by your lecturers in other journals other than those

published by KeMU

a. ………………………………………………………………………………

b. ………………………………………………………………………………

c. ………………………………………………………………………………

d. ………………………………………………………………………………

9. Indicate magazine/newsletter you know published by KeMU

a. ………………………………………………………………………………

b. ………………………………………………………………………………

c. ………………………………………………………………………………

d. ………………………………………………………………………………

141

10. Do you have any published/unpublished book/article? Yes No

a. If Yes to 10 above, have you submitted to the library for access by other

students?

Yes No

b. If No to 10 above why?

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………

11. Do you agree with the following statements?

Statement Strongly

agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

disagree

The librarians assist a lot

in choice of information

materials to use.

The library provides all the

information materials

needed

It is very easy to access

information materials

produced by student

organizations

Students practicum

reports, projects and theses

are easily available in the

library

The librarians assist in the

search of lecture notes,

past papers, theses,

journals you need

142

12. What do you think the library could do to enhance the access of local content to

you?

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………

143

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR LECTURERS

Section A: Bio Data

1. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

2. What is your designation? ……………………………………………………..

3. How long have been in KeMU? …………………………………….….………

4. What does your work involve?............................................................................

5. What courses/units do you teach?.......................................................................

Section B: Publications

1. List the publications/articles you have published/yet to publish.

a. ……………………………………………………………………………..

b. …………………………………………………………………………….

c. …………………………………………………………………………….

d. …………………………………………………………………………….

e. …………………………………………………………………………….

2. Have you submitted any of your publications/articles to the library?

Yes No

a. If YES to 2 above list those submitted

………………………………………………………………………………

b. If NO to 2 above why?

………………………………………………………………………………

Section C: Library

1. How often do you use the library?

…………………………………………………………

2. What information is relevant in accomplishing your work?

………………………………………………………………………………………

144

3. Is this information available in the library?

…………..…………………………………………………………………………

4. Do you use locally published/produced information materials?

…………………………………………………………………………..………..

a. If YES to 4 above. Where do you get this information from?

i. Library

ii. Their authors

iii. Departments

iv. KeMU website

v. Internet

5. How easy is it to find information from the library?

………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Has the library ever approached you to collect content you have created?

a. If YES to 6 above. How often does the library do this?

……………………………………………………………………………..

7. List any books, magazines, journals, research papers you know that have been

published by KeMU staff/students?

a. ……………………………………………………………………………..

b. ………………………………………………………………………………

c. ………………………………………………………………………………

d. ………………………………………………………………………………

e. ……………………………………………………………………………..

8. On a scale of 1 to 5. How would you rate the importance of library to your work

at KeMU? ……………………………………………………………………

145

9. What do you think is the role of library in locally produced/published information

materials?...................................................................................................................

10. What do you think the library could do to manage locally produced content

………………………………………………………………………………………

146

APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR COLLECTION DEVELOPMENT

LIBRARIAN

Section A: Bio data

1. How long have been in KeMU ……………………………………………

years

2. How long have you been a collection development librarian in

KeMU………… years

3. How long have you been in collection development department of an

academic library? ……… years

4. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

Section B:

1. Does KeMU library collection development policy recognize local content?

............................................................................................................................

2. If YES to 1 above. What constitutes local content in the library?

…………………………………………………………………………………

3. How does KeMU library capture/acquire local content?

…………………………………………………………………………………

4. What are the processing procedures for local content?

…………………………………………………………………………………

5. What access points are available for users while searching and retrieving local

content from KeMU library?

…………………………………………………………………………………

147

6. What challenges do you face while:

a. Collecting/capturing local content

…………………………………………………………………………

b. Processing local content

…………………………………………………………………

c. Dissemination of local content

…………………………………………………………………

148

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR ELECTRONIC SERVICES

LIBRARIAN

Section A: Bio Data

1. How long have been in KeMU? ……………………………………………

years

2. How long have you been an electronic services librarian in KeMU?…………

years

3. How long have you been in electronic services department in an academic

library? ……… years

4. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

Section B:

1. Does KeMU library electronic services access policy recognize local content?

..............................................................................................................................

2. If YES to 1 above. What services are there for:

a. Creators/producers of local content

…………………………………………………………………………

b. Users of local content

……………………………………………………………………………

3. Which software(s) are used for management of local content?

…………………………………………………………………………………

4. Are these software(s) open source? …………………………………………..

a. If YES to 4 above. Why opt for open source software

………………………………………………………………………………………

149

5. What challenges do you face while:

a. Selecting software for local content management

………………………………………………………………………………………

b. Using the software to manage local content

………………………………………………………………………………………

c. Training users and creator/producers of local content to use the

software for local content management

.……………………………………………………………………………………

6. What security measures are in place for the local content?

………………………………………………………………………………………

7. What security measures are in place or local content management software

against virus, hacking, and intrusion?

………………………………………………………………………………………

150

APPENDIX E: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR DEANS/HEAD OF

PROGRAMMES

Section A: Bio-Data

1. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

2. What is your designation? …………………………………………………..

3. How long have been in KeMU? …………………………………….………

4. What does your work involve?

a. …………………………………………………………………………

b. …………………………………………………………………………

c. …………………………………………………………………………

d. …………………………………………………………………………

e. …………………………………………………………………………

Section B:

1. List the publications/articles published by your department/programme

a. …………………………………………………………………………

b.…………………………………………………………………………

c. …………………………………………………………………………

d.…………………………………………………………………………

e. …………………………………………………………………………

2. How are publications produced or created by your department/programme

managed?

………………………………………………………………………………

3. Have any publications by your department been submitted to the library?

Yes No

a. If YES to 3 above list those submitted

…………………………………………………………………………

151

b. If NO to 3 above why?

………………………………………………………………………………

4. Does your department have a policy on publishing/creation of content?

Yes No

a. If YES to 4 above what incentives does it offer to encourage local

publishing or creation of content?

………………………………………………………………………………

…

b. If NO to 4 above what guidelines are in use

………………………………………………………………………………

c. If NO to 4 above. Are there plans to have a publishing policy in your

department/programme?

Yes No

Section C:

1. How often do you use the library? …………………………………………..

2. What information is relevant in accomplishing your work?

………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Is this information available in the library? ……………………………………

4. Do you use locally published/produced information materials?

…………………………………………………………………………………..

a. If YES to 4 above. Where do you get this information from?

Library Their authors Departments KeMU website

152

5. How easy is it to find information from the library?

………………………………………………………………………………………

6. How often does the library collect content that has been created/published by

your department/programme?

……………………………………………………………………….………….

7. List any books, magazines, journals, research papers you know published by

KeMU staff?

………………………………………………………………………………………

8. On a scale of 1 to 5. How would you rate the importance of library to your

work at KeMU?

……………………………………………………………………

9. What do you think is the role of library in locally produced/published

information materials?

………………………………………………………………………………………

10. What do you think the library could do to manage locally produced content

………………………………………………………………………………………

153

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR UNIVERSITY LIBRARIAN

Section A: Bio Data

1. How long have been in KeMU? ……………………………………………

years

2. How long have you been in academic library management?

…………………… years

3. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

Section B:

1. Does the library have a local content policy?

……………………………………………………………………..……………

a. If YES to 1 above. What constitutes local content?

………………………………………………………………………………………

b. If NO to 1 above what guidelines are in use for local content

management?

.……………………………………………………………………………………

2. What incentives are there for users to deposit local content they have

created/published in the library

………………………………………………………………………………………

3. Does the library have a copyright policy to protect the local content

creators/producers?

…………………………………………………………………………….…….

a. If YES to 3 above. How is this done?

…………………………………………………………………………………

154

4. Is there collaboration policy concerning creating and sharing local content?

a. If YES to 4 above. What are the rights of creators and institutions

involved?

…………………………………………………………………………………

5. Does library has an open source software policy? …………………….……….

a. If YES to 5 above. To what extent is this policy implemented?

…………………………………………………………………………………

6. What software(s) are in use for managing local content at KeMU?

………………………………………………………………………………………

7. What are the challenges experienced in local content management?

………………………………………………………………………………………

155

APPENDIX G: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR ICT DIRECTOR

Section A: bio data

1. How long have you worked in KeMU? ……………………………………………

years

2. How long have you been the ICT Director? …………………… years

3. How long have you been in management of ICT of universities in Kenya?.………

years

4. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

Section B:

1. What incentives are in place for encouraging students and staff to use ICTs to do

research, create, and publish content?

………………………………………………………………………………………

2. Does the ICTs available make it easy for users to deposit local content they have

created/published in the library ………………………………………..…………..

a. If yes to 2 above. How is this done?

………………………………………………………………………………………

Are there software and hardware that assist in capturing, collecting, collating and

dissemination of locally-created/published content? ..........................................................

b. If yes to 3 above. On a scale of 1-5 how well are these software and

hardware used. ……………………………………………………...……...

3. Does ICT department have a privacy policy to protect the local content

creators/producers work from being viewed/accessed before being published?

a. If YES to 4 above. How is this done?

156

4. Is there software(s) that enables collaboration for creating, capturing, processing,

dissemination and sharing of local content with other institutions? …………

a. If YES to 5 above. Which software(s) is this?

…………………………………………………………………………………

b. Are these software open source? ……………………….…………………..

c. How well does the software allow collaboration (on a scale of 1-5)

…………………………………………………………………………..…..

5. Has the ICT department documented any procedures or guidelines for users who

need to access locally produced/created content? ………………………………….

a. If YES to 6 above. On a scale of 1-5 how useful are these guidelines

………………………………………………………………………..……

6. Has ICT department developed an open source software policy?

…………………………………………………………………………………….

a. If YES to 7 above. To what extent is this policy implemented.

…………………………………………………………………………………

b. On a scale of 1-5. How successful have this policy been in encouraging

use of open source software? ………………………………………………

7. What software(s) are in use for managing local content at KeMU

………………………………………………………………………………………

a. Which among these software(s) are open source?

………………………………………………………………………………………

What are the challenges experienced in providing ICTs to facilitate local content

creation, capturing, processing, storage, dissemination, collaboration, retrieval

and use?

………………………………………………………………………………………

157

APPENDIX H: INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FOR DVC - ACADEMIC AFFAIRS

Section A: bio data

1. How long you have been in KeMU?………………………………………

years

2. How long have you been DVC Academic Affairs?. ……………………

years

3. How long have you been in management of universities in Kenya? …..

years

4. What is your academic level? Degree, Masters, Doctorate, Post-Doctorate

Section B:

1. Does the KeMU have a local content policy? ……………………………

a. If YES to 1 above. What constitutes local content according to that policy?

………………………………………………………………………………………

b. If NO to 1 above what guidelines are in use for local content

management?

………………………………………………………………………………………

2. What incentives are in place for encouraging students and staff to do research,

create, and publish content?

………………………………………………………………………………………

3. What incentives are there for users to deposit local content they have

created/published in the library

………………………………………………………………………………………

158

4. Are there policies that govern how capturing, collecting, collating and

dissemination of locally created/published content should be done?

.................................................................................................................................

a. If yes to 4 above. On a scale of 1-5 how well has these policies succeeded.

………………………………………………………………………..…...

5. Does KeMU have a copyright policy to protect the local content

creators/producers?

………………………………………………………………………………………

a. If YES to 5 above. How is this done?

………………………………………………………………………………………

6. Is there collaboration policy concerning creating, capturing, processing,

dissemination and sharing of local content with other institutions? …………

a. If YES to 6 above. What are the rights of creators and institutions

involved?

………………………………………………………………………………………

7. Does the university have any documented procedures or guidelines for users who

need to access locally produced/created content?

………………………………………………………………………………………

a. If YES to 7 above. On a scale of 1-5 how useful are they

………………………………………………………………………………

8. Does KeMU have an open source software policy?

………………………………………………………………………………………

.

159

a. If YES to 8 above. To what extent is this policy implemented.

…………………………………………………………………………………

b. On a scale of 1-5. How successful have this policy been in encouraging

use of open source software?

……………………………………………………………………………..

9. What software(s) are in use for managing local content at KeMU

.……………………………………………………………………………………

10. What are the challenges experienced in developing and implementing policies for

local content creation, capturing, processing, storage, dissemination,

collaboration, retrieval and use?

a. ……………………………………………………………………………..

b. ……………………………………………………………………………..