A survey of collection development practices in technical institutes in Ghaziabad, Utter Pradesh, India.

Kumar, Krishna ; Hussain, Akhtar ; Singh, Neetu 等

Introduction

This study is a survey of technical institute libraries in Ghaziabad, Utter Pradesh, India. A list of the libraries in the population is found in Appendix 1. The survey sought to determine the nature of the collection, tools that are used to access it, funds allocated, and the characteristics of the user population. Technical institutes generally offer courses and degrees in engineering, technology, management, and related fields.

Library and information science (LIS) has no rigorous definition of "collection," which represents many different entities that are often seen from a library management perspective. Since collections have been associated with the physical library, it is uncertain how the concept of a collection means in the virtual world. The purpose of this study is to explore what constitutes a collection in the current environment, where information is increasingly made available digitally.

Collection development includes activities such as assessing user needs, evaluating the present collection, determining selection policies, coordinating selection, re-evaluating and storing parts of the collection, and planning for resource sharing. Thus, collection development is not a single activity but a group of activities. Acquisitions is usually distinguished from collection development, and refers do the process of verifying, ordering, and making payments for materials. There has been a general belief that there is a positive correlation between the collection size and its performance in terms of patron satisfaction. If a library ceased adding fresh material to its collection, it would soon have a negative effect on the library's services. A collection development policy is essential for a balanced and robust collection. It specifies the scope of the collection, authority for selection, criteria for allocation of funds and for selection of various types of materials, priorities in selection, and criteria for weeding.

Objectives of the Study:

* To determine the purposes for which the collection is used by the library professional/staff of technical institutes in Ghaziabad District.

* To identify the availability of collections in technical institute libraries

* To reveal the present status of print, non-print, and e-resources in the libraries under study.

* To discover the strength and weakness of the collection of the libraries under study.

* To examine and evaluate collection development policies of the technical institute libraries, looking at fund allocation

* To examine user satisfaction with the collection and services of technical institute libraries.

* To discover the availability of staff training facilities in technical institute libraries.

* To identify usable software and ways of using it.

* To identify library software packages that can handle collection building.

* To identify hardware is used for collection building.

* To discover cataloging methods used in technical institute libraries.

Methodology

Data were gathered using a survey and then organized and tabulated. Twenty questionnaires were distributed and fifteen were returned.

Literature Review

The literature of collection development is vast. General treatments of academic library collection development include Gessesse (2000), Nisonger (1999), Rowley and Black (1996), Seth, Ramesh, and Sahu (1997), Susana, Vignau, and Meneses (2005), Taylor (1999), and Wessels (1995). Explorations of particular countries and case studies of individual libraries include Andrada and Vergueiro (1996), Maharana, Choudhury, and Dutta (2004), and Sinha and Tucker (2005). Digital collections are of particular interest. Authors who discuss this topic include Arlitch and Johnson (2005), Cole and Shreeves (2004), Kiondo (2004), Leung (2005), Nikolaidou et al. (2005), and Ashoor (2005). Tools such as metadata systems and software are pertinent to collection development. Works on those topics include Bekaert, et al. (2002), Calanag, Tabata, and Suginoto (2004), and Mutula and Makondo (2003).

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Collections were classified into three categories. Table 1 shows that the 15 (100%) respondents use both type Indian and Foreign collections.

Table 2 shows that the majority of institutes under study (93.33%) have collections mainly in English, followed by Hindi (16.67%). Other languages represent a very small percentage (6.66%), and Urdu/Sanskrit are not represented at all.

Taken together, the institutes in the study have 373,532 books, nearly 6,000 Thesis/Dissertation, about 1,000 periodicals, 1,410 bound volumes, and 6,702 non-book items. S.R.M. has the largest collection, followed by R.K.G.I.E.T., and K.I.E.T.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table-4 focuses that the library users and faculty members. The total number of faculty members are 1,593. A.K.G.I.E.T. has the most faculty, with 507 (31.82%), followed by K.I.E.T. at 150 (9.41%).

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 5 shows that R.K.G.I.E.T. has the largest budget, followed by V.I.E.T. Some technical substitutes have no particular budget for library materials.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 6 shows that, at the post-graduate (P.G.) level, 12 institutes (80%) offer the MCA, 9 (60%) the MBA. It is clear that the MCA and B. Tech are the most popular courses offered.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 7 depicts the use of information technology, including those libraries who have computerized, and those who plan to do so.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Respondents are using a variety of software with no clear majority.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 9 indicates nearly all respondents are using Pentium hardware.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 10 shows that while many of the institutions have a substantial periodical budget, a number have no fixed allocation.

Table 11 show that nearly all the institutions (14-93.33%) use agency procurement, while 10 (66.66%) also procure directly.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 12 shows that most coverage is at the national level.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Table 13 shows that 12 institutions (80%) use AACR II as a cataloging code, while 14 (93.33%) of the respondents use Dewey Decimal (DDC) for classificaiton and one institute (6.66%) uses Colon Classification (CC)

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

DELNET is the most popular and extensively-used link among analyzed libraries.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

A majority of the professionals work at R.K.G.I.E.T., while a majority of non-professionals are at K.I.E.T., A.B.E.S. and I.M.S.

Table 16 shows that a majority of library professional have software training at V.I.E.T.

The results show that 14 institutions (93.33%) provide reprography service.

[GRAPHIC OMITTED]

Findings and Conclusion

The collections of respondents' libraries include both Indian and foreign literature. The vast majority of collections are English language material (93.33%), followed by Hindi (16.67%). Most of the institutions in the population do not have substantial library collections in any format, although selected institutions do have adequate collections of books, theses and dissertations, and periodicals. The libraries of the technical institutes in the population serve faculty, research scholars, graduate students, and undergraduates. The majority of the institutes have no research scholars, while all have users in all the other categories. The budget for library materials is variable in the population. Some have no special library allocation. Most of the institutions devote their budget to the purchase of science and engineering material. Two-thirds of the institutions in the population offer the B. Tech. degree to undergraduates, while 80 percent offer the MCA at the graduate level. Eighty percent of respondents stated that their institutions were fully computerized. More than half the institutions are part of Delnet.

Technical institutes represent a growing sector of the higher education market. This is demonstrated by the array of institutions found in Ghaziabad alone. Regular budget allocations, continued computerization, and move toward digital collections would strengthen the information resources provided for the clientele of these institutions.

Appendix 1. List of Technical Institutes and Abbreviations:

Abbreviation Name

Dr. K.N. Modi Dr KN Modi Institute of Engineering & Technology

K.I.E.T. Krishna Institute Of Engineering And
 Technology, Ghaziabad

A.K.G.I.E.T. Ajay Kumar Garg Engineering College

U.IM.T. Unique Institute of Management & Technology Ghaziabad

B.B.I.T. Babu Banarsi Das Institute of Technology, Ghaziabad
 IT, B.TECH ...

I.P.E.M. Institute of Professional Excellence &
 Management Ghaziabad

V.I.E.T. Vishveshwarya Institute of Engineering and Technology

I.N.M.A.N.T.C. INMANTEC: Integrated Academy of Management
 and Technology

A.B.E.S. ABES Engineering College : Academy of Business
 and Engineering Sciences

K.N.G.D. KNGD Modi Engineering College

S.R.M. SRM INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT & TECHNOLOGY

H.R.I.T. Harish Chandra Ram Kali Institute of Technology

I.M.R. Institute of Management and Research

R.K.G.I.E.T. Raj Kumar Goel Institute of Technology

I.N.S. Institute of Management Studies

Works Cited

Andrada, Diva and Vergueiro Waldomiro. Collection Development in Academic Libraries: A Brazilian Library's Experience. New Library World. 97 (4); 1996, Jul. 15-24. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/03074809610120171>

Arlitch, Kenning and Jonsson, Jeff. Aggregating Distributed Digital Collection in the Mountain West: Digital Library with the ContentDM Multi-Site Server. Library Hi Tech. 23 (2); 2005, Jun.; 220-232. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830510605179>

Ashoor, Mohammad-Salch. Information Literacy: A Case Study of the KFUPM Library. The Electronic Library. 23 (4); 2005, Aug.; 398-409. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02640470510611463>

Bekaert, Jeroen, et al. Metadata Based Access to Multimedia Architectural and Historical Archive Collection: A Review. Aslib Proceedings. 54 (6); 2002, Dec., 362-371. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00012530210452564>

Calanag, Maria Luisa, Tabata, Koichi, and Suginoto, Shigeo. Linking Preservation Metadata and Collection Management Policies. Collection Building. 23 (2); 2004, Jun.; 56-63. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604950410514730>

Cole, Timothy W. and Shreeves, Sarah L.. Search and Discovery across Collections: The IMLS Digital Collection and Content Project. Library Hi Tech. 22 (3); 2004, Sep.; 307-322. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830410560107>

Gessesse, Kebede. Collection Development and Management in the Twenty First Century with Special Reference to Academic Libraries. Library Management. 21 (7); 2000, Oct.; 365-372. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01435120010372551>

Kiondo, Elizabeth. Around the World to: The University of Dares Salaam Library: Collection Development in the Electronic Information Environment. Library Hi Tech News. 21 (6); 2004, Jul.; 19-24. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07419050410554861>

Leung, Shirley W. International Conference of Developing Digital Institutional Repositories: Experiences and Challenges. Library Hi Tech News. 22 (2); 2005, Feb.; 14-15. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07419050510593335>

Maharana, Bulu, Choudhury, BK, and Dutta, Sxamashree. Collection Development of Electronic Information Resources in the R & D Libraries of Kolkata City: A Survey. Library Herald. 42 (3); 2004, September; 235-245.

Mutula, Stephen M. and Makondo, Francina S. IT Skills Needs for Collection Development at the University Botswana Library. Library Hi Tech. 21 (1); 2003, Mar., 94-101. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830310467436>

Nikolaidou, Mara, Anagnostopoulos, Dimosthenis and Hatzopoulos, Michael. Development of Medical Digital Library Managing Multiple Collections. The Electronic Library. 23 (2); 2005, Apr. 221-236. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02640470510592933>

Nisonger, Thomas E.. A Review of the 1997 Collection Development and Management Literature. Collection Building. 18 (2); 1999, June; 67-80.

Rowley, Gordon and Black, William K. Consequences of Change: The Evolution of Collection Development. Collection Building. 15 (2); 1996, Jun.; 22-30. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604959610113879>

Seth, Mk, Ramesh, Db and Sahu, Jr. Utility of Library Collection in a Special Library: A Case Study. IASLIC Bulletin. 42 (3); 1997; 107-110.

Sinha, Reeta and Tucker, Cory. New Program Growth and Its Impact on Collection Assessment At UNLV Libraries. Library Hi Tech. 23 (3); 2005, Sep., 362-371. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/07378830510621775>

Susana, Barbara, Vignau, Sanchez and Meneses, Grizly. Collection Development Policies in University Libraries: A Space for Reflection. Collection Building. 24 (1); 2005, March; 35-43. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604950510576119>

Taylor, Donald. Standards Collection Development in an Academic Library. Collection Building. 18 (4); 1999, Dec., 148-152. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/01604959910303280>

Wessels, R. H. A. Optimizing the Size of Journal Collections in Libraries. Interlending & Document Supply. 23 (3); 1995, Sep., 19-21. <http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/02641619510155031>

Krishna Kumar

Central Library, Ch. Charan Singh University

Meerut, Utter Pradesh, India

Akhtar Hussain

Research Scholar, Department of Library & Information Science

A.M.U., Aligarh-202002, Utter Pradesh, India

Neetu Singh

Former Student of Department of Library & Information Science

Central Library, Ch. Charan Singh University

Meerut, Utter Pradesh, India

Table 1: Collections

 Number
Collection of Respondents Percentage

Foreign Nil
Indian Nil
Both 15 100%

Table 2. Language of the Collection

 Number of
Language Respondents Percentages

Hindi 9 16.67%
English 14 93.33%
Urdu/Sanskrit x Nil
Others 1 7%

Table 3: Document Collection (See Appendix 1 for
Institute names and abbreviations)

Name of the Book Thesis/
Institute Dissertation

Dr. K.N. Modi 24,500(6.55%) x
K.I.E.T. 31,000(8.29%) x
A.K.G.I.E.T. 18088(4.84%) 817(13.85%)
U.I.M.T. 8,336(2.23%) 1000(16.96%)
B.B.I.T. 13,600(3.64%) 50(0.84%)
I.P.E.M. 15,000(4.81%) 2500(42.40%)
V.I.E.T. 15850(4.24%) 518(8.78%)
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 15,000(4.01%) 450(7.63%)
A.B.E.S. 22,000 (5.88%) 305(5.17%)
K.N.G.D. 8,000(2.14%) x
S.R.M. 12,500(33.46%) 100(1.69%)
H.R.I.T. 9000(2.40%) x
I.M.R. 9000(2.40%) 100(1.69%)
R.K.G.I.E.T. 39,158(10.48%) x
I.M.S. 20,000(5.35%) 56(0.94%)
Total 373532 5896

Name of the
Institute Indian Foreign

Dr. K.N. Modi 42 (5.22%) 12 (1.12%)
K.I.E.T. 130(16.16%) 85(79.43%)
A.K.G.I.E.T. 47(5.84%) 20(1.86%)
U.I.M.T. 50(6.21%) XNil
B.B.I.T. 95(11.81%) 35(3.27%)
I.P.E.M. 25(3.10%) 30(2.80%)
V.I.E.T. 47(5. 84%) 18(1.68%)
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 103(12.81%) 12(1.12%)
A.B.E.S. 52(6.46%) 12(1.12%)
K.N.G.D. 10(1.24%) 2(0.18%)
S.R.M. 57(7.08%) 9(0.84%)
H.R.I.T. 36(4.47%) 30(2.80%)
I.M.R. 58(7.21%) 17(1.58%)
R.K.G.I.E.T. 10(1.24%) X Nil
I.M.S. 42(5.22%) 23(2.14%)
Total 84 1070

Name of the Bound Audio visual
Institute Volumes aids

Dr. K.N. Modi 94(6.66%) x
K.I.E.T. 750(53.11%) 150(2.23%)
A.K.G.I.E.T. 176(12.48%) 507(7.56%)
U.I.M.T. x 130(1.99%)
B.B.I.T. x 250(3.73%)
I.P.E.M. x 2500(37.30%)
V.I.E.T. 155(10.99%) 180(2.68%)
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 6(0.42%) 536(7.99%)
A.B.E.S. 20(1.48%) 148(2.20%)
K.N.G.D. x x
S.R.M. 13.8(9.78%) 1050(15.66%)
H.R.I.T. x x
I.M.R. x 850(4.14%)
R.K.G.I.E.T. 50(3.54%) 278(4.14%)
I.M.S. 21(1.48%) 123(1.83)
Total 1410 6702

Table 4: Library Users and Faculty Members

 Number
 Number of of the Number Number
Name of the faculty Research of P.G. of U.G.
Institute Member Scholar Student Student

Dr. K.N. Modi 90(5.64%) X 220(6.17%) 1200(8.67%)
K.I.E.T. 150(9.41%) X 400(11.23%) 1600(11.56%)
A.K.G.I.E.T. 507(31.82%) X 128(3.59%) 1532(11.07%)
U.I.M.T. 10(0.62%) X 62(1.74%) 200(1.44%)
B.B.I.T. 80(5.02%) X 100(2.80%) 1020(7.37%)
I.P.E.M. 40(2.51%) 04(13.33%) 800(22.46%) 700(5.06%)
V.I.E.T. 75(4.70%) 05(16.60%) 150(4.21%) 1000(7.22%)
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 49(3.07%) X 250(7.02%) 300(2.16%)
A.B.E.S. 145(9.10%) 05(16.60%) 240(6.73%) 1700(12.29%)
K.N.G.D. 21(1.31%) X X 240(1.73%)
S.R.M. 40(2.51%) X 100(2.80%) 300(2.16%)
H.R.I.T. 35(2.19%) X X 240(1.73%)
I.M.R. 30(1.88%) X 600(16.84%) 600(4.33%)
R.K.G.I.E.T. 100(6.27%) 10(33.33%) 251(7.04%) 1600(11.56%)
I.M.S. 121(7.59%) 6(20%) 260(7.30%) 1600(11.56%)
Total 1593 30 3561 13832

Table 5: Budget

Name of the Applied Engineering Pure
Institute science Science

Dr. K.N. Modi x 8 Lac (16.60%) x
K.I.E.T. x x x

A.K.G.I.E.T. 2 Lac (50%) 11 Lac 2 Lac(50%)
 (22.83%)

U.I.M.T. x x x

B.B.I.T. x x x

I.P.E.M. x x x

V.I.E.T. x 11 Lac x
 (22.83%)

I.N.M.A.N.T.C. x x x

A.B.E.S. 1 Lac(25%) 6 Lac (12.45%) x

K.N.G.D. x x x

S.R.M. x 6 Lac (12.45%) 2 Lac(50%)

H.R.I.T. x x x

I.M.R. x x x

R.K.G.I.E.T. x 116,428 x
 (2.41%)

I.M.S. 1 Lac 5 Lac (10.38%) x
 (25%)

Total 4 Lac 4,816,420 4Lac

Name of the Others Total Budget
Institute

Dr. K.N. Modi x 8 Lac
K.I.E.T. x No fixed budget

A.K.G.I.E.T. 1 Lac(6.45%) 16 Lac (16.08%)

U.I.M.T. x 2 Lac (2.01%)
B.B.I.T. x No response
 No collection
I.P.E.M. x
 budget

V.I.E.T. 6 Lac(38.70%) 17 Lac(17.08%)

I.N.M.A.N.T.C. x x

A.B.E.S. 3 Lac(19.35%) 10 Lac (10.05%)

K.N.G.D. x 10 Lac (10.05%)

S.R.M. 2 Lac(12.90%) Four Lac (4.02%)

H.R.I.T. x No response

I.M.R. x 5,00,000

R.K.G.I.E.T. 18 Lac (18.09%)

I.M.S. 3.5 9.5 Lac (9.54%)
 Lac(22.58%)

Total 15.5 Lac 99.5 Lac

Table 6. Courses Offered

 No. of
 Class Courses Response Percentage

A. P.G. Level MBA 9 60%
 MCA 12 80%
 M.Tech 1 6.67%
 Others x Nil

B. U.G. Level B.Tech 10 66.67%
 B.Ed. 2 13.33%
 Others 6 40%

Table 7: Information Technology

 Number of
IT IT Response Percentage

A. Conventional method 4 26.66%
B. Computerized method 10 66.66%
C. Printed database 9 60%
D. New electronic database 7 47%
E. Computerization completed 12 80%
F. Plans for computerization 2 13.33%

Table 8. Software Used

 Number of
Lib. Software response Percentage

Alice for window 2 13.33%
Lib Guru 1 6.67%
CDS/ISIS/WINSIS 1 7%
Home made x x
Libsys x x
Soul x x
Virtua x x
Others 8 53.33%
NR = 1-1 2 13.33%

Table 9. Hardware Used

 No. of
Hardware response Percentage

A. Pentium 3 2 13.33%
B. Pentium 4 12 1
C. Others 1 6.67%

Table 10. Journals

Name of the Year Total cost Pure Applied
institute Science Science

K.N. Modi 2001-02 1,02,861
 2003-04 228695
 2004-05 382934
K.I.E.T. 2003-04 Not fixed
 2005-06 Not fixed
 2005-06 Not fixed
A.K.G.I.E.T. 2001-02 4,12,000
 2003-04 5,15,000
 2005-06 7 Lakh
U.I.M.T. 2001-02 14,000 8
 2003-04 14,000 8
 2005-06 23,000 40
B.B.I.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 2,00,000 8 35
I.P.E.M. 2001-02 20,000
 2003-04 40,000 8 25
 2005-06 1,50,000
V.I.E.T. 2001-02 3,00,000
 2003-04 4,00,000
 2005-06 9,00,000
INMANTIC 2001-02 33,000
 2003-04 96,000
 2005-06 1,33,000
A.B.E.S. 2001-02 50,000 5
 2003-04 1,500,000 7
 2005-06 3,50,000 13
K.N.G.D. 2001-02
 2003-4
 2005-06 12,000 4
S.R.M. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 3,00,000
H.R.I.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 45,100
I.M.R. 2001-02 7.2 Lac
 2003-04 7.5 Lac
 2005-06 7.5 Lac
R.K.G.I.E.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 3,38,000 28
I.M.S. 2001-02 45,000 5 15
 2003-04 75,000 7 25
 2005-06 2,50,000 13 41

Name of the Year Engineering Others
institute

K.N. Modi 2001-02 15
 2003-04 28
 2004-05 64
K.I.E.T. 2003-04
 2005-06
 2005-06
A.K.G.I.E.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06
U.I.M.T. 2001-02 4
 2003-04 4
 2005-06 4
B.B.I.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 77 10
I.P.E.M. 2001-02
 2003-04 70
 2005-06
V.I.E.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06
INMANTIC 2001-02 33
 2003-04 96
 2005-06 133
A.B.E.S. 2001-02 15
 2003-04 25
 2005-06 41
K.N.G.D. 2001-02
 2003-4
 2005-06 8
S.R.M. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06
H.R.I.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06 66
I.M.R. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06
R.K.G.I.E.T. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06
I.M.S. 2001-02
 2003-04
 2005-06

Table 11. Sources of Procurement

Direct Agency

10 14
66.66% 93.33%

Table 12. Institutional Coverage

 No. of
 respondents Percentage

International Level 3% 20%
National level 9% 16.67%
Organization on level 8% 53%

Table 13. Technical Processing

 No. of
Technical Process response Percentage

Cataloguing Scheme
(i)AACR -I
(ii)AACR-II 12 80%
(iii) CCC

Classification Scheme
DDC 14 93.33%
UDC
CC 1 6.66%

Table 14. Library Networking

 No. of
Network response Percentage

DELNET 8 53.33%
INFLIBNET
EARNET
Others 3 20%

Table 15. Human Resources

Name of the Non-
Institute Professional professional Total

Dr. K.N. Modi 6 (9.09%) 4 (11.76%) 10
K.I.E.T. 6 (9.09%) 4 (11.76%) 10
A.K.G.I.E.T. 4 (6.06%) 3 (8.82%) 7
U.IM.T. x x 0
B.B.I.T. 4 (6.06%) 2 (5.88%) 6
I.P.E.M. 3 (4.54%) 2 (5.88%) 5
V.I.E.T. 3 (4.54%) 2 (5.88%) 5
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 7 (10.60%) 3 (8.82%) 10
A.B.E.S. 5 (7.57%) 4 (11.76%) 9
K.N.G.D. 4 (6.06%) X 4
S.R.M. 2 (3.03%) 2 (5.88%) 4
H.R.I.T. 5 (7.57%) X 5
I.M.R. 3 (4.54%) 2 (5.88%) 5
R.K.G.I.E.T. 8 (12.12%) 2(5.88%) 10
I.N.S. 6 (9.09%) 4 (11.76%) 10
Total 66 34 100

Table 16. Staff Training
 Library
 Computer Software
Name of the Institutes programme Packages

Dr. K.N. Modi x x
K.I.E.T. 5 (9.43%) x
A.K.G.I.E.T. 4 (7.54%) x
U.IM.T. 3 (5.66%) x
B.B.I.T. 4 (7.54%) x
I.P.E.M. 3 (5.66%) x
V.I.E.T. 6 (11.32%) x
I.N.M.A.N.T.C. 4 (7.54%) x
A.B.E.S. 4 (7.54%)
K.N.G.D. X x
S.R.M. 1 (1.88%) x
H.R.I.T. 4 (7.54%) x
I.M.R. 5 (9.43%) x
R.K.G.I.E.T. 5 (9.43%) x
I.M.S. 5 (9.43%) x
Total 53

Table 17. Library Services

 No. of
 Response Percentage

Reprography 14 93.33%
Microfilming 1 6.66%
Microfiche
CAS
SDI
Others 9 16.67%

LANGUAGE OF THE COLLECTION

Hindi 16.67%
English 93.33%
Others 6.66%

Note: Table made from bar graph.