Alao, Folorunso, and Saka, Part 3
Methodology
Data for the study were collected from a total of 400 users of the University of Ilorin College of Health Science Library in May, 2007. The data were gathered and analyzed largely using the Kantor method.
Over four weeks in May 2007, copies of the two-part researcher-designed questionnaire were distributed to the clientele of the library who were using the card catalogue and/or browsing through the book stacks. The first part of the questionnaire was meant for the participating library users and it was designed to elicit the following from each respondent:
- User's library registration number, age group, gender, status, specialty if a staff member and major course of study if a student.
- The author(s), title(s) and call numbers of the book(s) sought and whether or not the book(s) was/were found.
Each respondent was requested to leave the completed questionnaire with the library staff on leaving the library. In all, 420 questionnaires were distributed; out of these 400 were duly completed and returned for analysis. The 400 questionnaires yielded a total 2,221 sought titles with 1,345 titles found and 876 titles not found.
As the questionnaires were returned, two research assistants checked the reportedly ‘not found’ books against the library's shelves and records and then noted in the appropriate column in part two of the questionnaire the reason(s) for not finding the books.
From the data gathered on the books searched, the overall book availability rate for the library was computed using the following formula (Morgan, 1995):
Then, following the Kantor model, the reasons for not finding the books searched were divided into four categories, each of which represented a performance measure. From these data, a branching diagram was constructed from which the values of the four performance measures for the library, represented by the symbols PU, PL, PC and PA, were calculated using the formulas (Wulff, 1978):
PA = V/W, where W equals the total number of books searched and PU, PL, PC, and PA each represents the performance level derived for each performance measure using the branching diagram.