CHAPTER THREE : FINDINGS

Interviews/Questionnaires
Citation analysis
Library count of journal use

Data was collected each year for three years (1996, 1997, 1998) by: interview/questionnaire with the academic staff in two faculties/schools in each university; an analysis of journals cited in projects, theses and academic staff publications from the same faculties/schools; and a count of journals used in the university libraries.

The findings presented in the tables, which follow, are the mean average of the findings of each of the three years. In some cases, data was only collected for one or two of the years and, where appropriate, this is indicated. Findings for UGL and UNZA are given separately, so that any differences in usage between arts/social sciences and applied sciences/medicine can be seen. In general, there was no significant difference between the yearly results. If there was any difference, this has been indicated.

Interviews/Questionnaires

The interviews held with academic staff and the questionnaires completed by them aimed to find out if and why journals were read, which titles were considered the most useful and how they might be made more useful. These issues were raised in the context of both journals in general and of journals published in Africa. Questions were asked on the importance of journal literature, identification and acquisition of journal articles and the ways in which journals assisted teaching and research. Titles of journals consulted regularly were requested. In addition academic staff were asked how they rated the importance of African-published journals and how such journals could be made more useful.

Additionally in 1998, staff were asked specifically about their use of ICT in identifying and obtaining journal articles and whether their perception of journals had changed over the three-year period of the research.

The percentages in the tables refer to the numbers of academic staff. Not all respondents answered all of the questions. Except where indicated, there was no significant difference between replies of academic staff from Arts and Social Studies at UGL and from Agricultural Sciences and Medicine at UNZA.

Importance

1. Journal literature is:

UGL	UNZA
92%	95%	Important to current academic work (e.g. overwhelmingly because journals provide the latest information and explore the frontiers of knowledge in area of specialization; provide a means of sharing experiences)
56%	62%	More important than other types of literature (e.g. more current and accessible; concise and easily readable; more relevant; better methodologies)
40%	32%	Equally important as other types of literature (e.g. books are more useful for teaching; books provide overall theoretical frameworks; journals and books complement each other; research reports and archival material equally important in some subjects)
3%	6%	Less important than other types of literature (e.g. relevant journals not available; more authoritative information is found in textbooks)

There were some differences between the replies from the two faculties at UGL. In 1998, for example, 46% in Social Studies as opposed to 27% in Arts rated journals more important than other types of literature and 18% of those in Arts compared to none in Social Studies rated journals as less important.

2. African-published journals, compared to journals published elsewhere, are:

UGL	UNZA
19%	18%	More important (e.g. provide necessary background information on Africa; relevant; articles are empirical)
49%	49%	Equally important (e.g. are complementary, in that they are specific to Africa, whilst Western journals discuss subjects theoretically and in general; easy to obtain if locally published)
26%	30%	Less important (e.g. not available; irregular; not very relevant; research is less focused and content less reliable; not raised bv literature searches)

Some academics at both universities expressed difficulty in answering this question, because they felt that their access to African-published journals was too limited. Many of those who did comment, did so in the context of the potential importance of African-published journals, should they be published and available in relevant subject disciplines.

The point was made also at both universities that the most important research that is carried out in Africa is published in foreign journals and therefore local ones are not needed.

A difference between the two universities that could affect perception of journals is that UGL does not give equal weight to articles appearing in African-published journals for purposes of promotion. At UNZA all journals are recognized as equal. At UGL, some academics gave this as their reason for stating that Africa-published journals are less important.

Use made of journals
Titles

3. Journals most used are:

UGL	UNZA
70%	77%	All non-African
2%	0%	Included three African titles
25%	22%	Included one or two African titles

Inclusion of African-published titles amongst those most used increased considerably over the years. Overall, the naming of all non-African journals fell from 84% in 1996 to 61% in 1998. Medical staff mostly favoured international journals. In 1998, only 9% included an African-published title in their list, compared to 67% in Agricultural Sciences. In some departments at UGL, the same African-published titles appeared in all lists of most-used journals, e.g. African Journal of Library, Archives & Information Science in the Department of Library and Archival Studies and Ife Psychologia in the Department of Psychology.

4. Regular consultation of African-published journals:

UGL	UNZA
53%	64%	Two or three titles
29%	20%	One title
18%	14%	No titles
49%	53% (97/98)	Included one or more Ghanaian/Zambian titles

Some academics found it difficult to differentiate between journals published in Africa and those with an African content published elsewhere; some of their answers to the question on African-published titles had therefore to be discounted. Others continued to name African journals that had ceased publication, presumably because there was nothing to replace them.

The three Ghanaian journals most consulted were Legon Journal of the Humanities, Research Review of the Institute of African Studies, Legon and Universitas; because these were published by the University, they were easily available. Staff in Social Studies consulted more African journals published outside of Ghana than did their colleagues in Arts (43% in Social Studies as compared to 73% in Arts named at least one Ghanaian journal in their selection of regularly used African-published journals).

In Zambia, all staff in Medicine consulted African-published journals. The most popular were East African Medical Journal and South African Medical Journal. In Agricultural Sciences, the Zambian Journal of Agricultural Science, produced in the School and free to members of the professional association, was usually included. The titles named did encompass the major journals being produced in Eastern and Southern Africa.

Purpose of journal use

5. Journal literature is used for:

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
89%	95%	73%	78%	Ongoing and future research
90%	88%	61%	72%	Updating lecture notes
80%	43%	59%	41%	Recommended student reading
54% (97/98)	49% (97/98)	41% (97/98)	37% (97/98)	Basis of a lecture
14%	11%	13%	4%	Updating knowledge; access to recent research trends

Academic staff were asked to state why they used journals, both in teaching and research. Those in Social Studies tended to use journals in general, as well as African-published journals, more intensively and for a greater variety of purposes than their colleagues in Arts. Those in Medicine rarely used journals in teaching.

In 1998, staff were additionally asked to rate the reasons listed in order of their importance. At both UGL and UNZA, research was the most favoured (73% for journals in general, 63% for African-published), followed by updating of lecture notes (53% for journals in general, 43% for African-published). Far fewer staff gave recommended student reading as the primary reason (13% for journals in general, 17% for African-published).

Identification of journal articles

6. Relevant journal articles are identified through:

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
76%	68%	48%	50%	References in other publications
61%	44%	53%	36%	Browsing the current issue
40%	66%	21%	32%	Current contents/indexing/abstracting services
32%	34%	37%	51%	Recommendation from colleague
18% (97/98)	34% (97/98)	17% (97/98)	37% (97/98)	Newsletter
4% (98)		0% (98)		Display in bookshops, at conferences, etc.
	0% (98)		10% (98)	Subscription
4%	7%	14%	10%	No way at all

At UGL, staff in Social Studies favoured the use of indexing and abstracting tools much more than their colleagues in Arts, both for journals in general and African-published journals. In 1998, 31% rated these as their primary method for identifying journal articles in general as opposed to 9% in Arts. (However the fact that the Faculty of Social Studies contains the Department of Library and Archival Studies - from which 9 staff returned questionnaires - is likely to cause a bias in this direction.) But, overall, references in other publications was rated the key identification tool (25%). At UNZA, it was medical staff who used indexing and abstracting tools, rather than staff in agricultural sciences. This accounts for the fact that this method was rated the most important means of identification (25%) for journals in general, followed by references in other publications (20%) and browsing (20%).

For African journals, receiving a recommendation from a colleague (33%) followed by browsing the current issue (22%), were rated as the primary means of identification at both universities. At UGL, 19% of staff felt that, more often than not, there was no way at all to identify articles in African-published journals.

Acquisition of journal articles

7. Journal articles are acquired through:

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
65%	63%	49%	47%	University library
62%	46%	55%	46%	Personal contacts
42%	41%	35%	18%	Departmental library (if available)
33%	36%	32%	14%	Purchase of subscription
30%	50%	23%	37%	Other libraries, including subject networks
3%	4%	12%	16%	No way at all

It was acknowledged that the university library could no longer meet all needs and that it was therefore necessary to use a variety of methods to obtain journal articles. Departmental libraries were preferred to the university library when available and subject networks were also used by staff in Social Studies and Agricultural Sciences, e.g. AERC, CABI, ICRAF. (The exception was staff in Medicine who continued to rely heavily on the university library, but a university library which was a branch specifically serving their needs and therefore similar to a departmental library.)

At UGL, the use of the university library remained fairly static over the three years, whereas the use of other means of acquisition for journals in general rose as follows: departmental libraries from 26% in 1996 to 63% in 1998; personal contacts from 55% in 1996 to 77% in 1998; other libraries from 15% in 1996 to 46% in 1998.

At UGL, the method of acquisition rated as the most important in 1998 for both journals in general (37%) and African-published journals (32%) was personal contacts. Departmental libraries were equal with the university library for journals in general (19%) but preferred for African-published (26% cf. 18%). At UNZA, the primary method was the university library (35% for both types of journal), followed by personal contacts (30% for journals in general and 20% for African-published).

Use of ICT

8. Identification of journal articles through electronic means (1998 only):

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
9%	55%	0%	20%	Internet
25%	35%	7%	25%	CD-ROM
11%	35%	0%	15%	E-mail
64%	25%	91%	60%	None

9. Acquisition of journal articles through electronic means (1998 only):

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
7%	50%	2%	15%	Internet
9%	35%	5%	10%	CD-ROM
11%	25%	5%	10%	E-mail
77%	20%	91%	65%	None

At UGL, the majority of staff in both faculties did not use electronic means, either to identify or obtain journal articles and, in particular, for journals published in Africa. Some staff indicated that their use of ICT was restricted to those times when they travelled out of Ghana and were able to visit other universities. Staff in Social Studies made greater use of the CD-ROM and e-mail facilities available in the main university library. (But, again, this result may be influenced by the closer contact with the library and professional knowledge of ICT enjoyed by staff from the Department of Library and Archival Studies.)

At UNZA, many more staff in Medicine than in the Agricultural Sciences used the Internet. Those who used electronic means pointed out that they were rarely able to identify or acquire articles from African-published journals by this method.

Improvements

10. Ways suggested to improve the usefulness of African-published journals are:

UGL	UNZA
49% (97/98)	60% (97/98)	Better marketing and distribution by journals
40%	52%	More regular publication
40%	43%	Circulation of new issues or tables of contents to members of the academic staff
38% (98)	50% (98)	Establish a separate current contents, indexing or abstracting service for African-published journals
16% (96/98)	35% (96/98)	Better researched articles
25%	39%	Index and abstract in international databases
28% (96/97)	28% (96/97)	Make available in university/departmental library
13% (97/98)	39% (97/98)	Exercise better refereeing and editorial control

At UGL, staff in Arts favoured more regular publication and better researched articles; those in Social Studies rated improved marketing and the circulation of new issues and tables of contents as more important. It was interesting to note that only staff who used current contents/indexing/abstracting services to identify journal articles also rated the inclusion of articles from African-published journals in international databases as the most important improvement. Overall more regular publication (40%) was the improvement rated the highest, followed by the circulation of new issues or TOCs (23%).

At UNZA, staff in both Schools wanted to see more regular publication of African journals. Those in Agricultural Sciences favoured improved marketing, whilst those in Medicine rated better researched articles higher on their list of improvements. Overall better marketing and distribution (40%) was the improvement rated the highest, followed by a separate current contents or indexing service for African-published journals.

A few academics suggested that the answer would be to publish more journals in a greater variety of subject fields, but one respondent thought that the recent proliferation of journals, containing low quality articles, had affected general sustainability. Others suggested that Africans should be more encouraged to publish in African journals and that it would help if UGL authorities fully recognized these journals. A more general feeling was that journals should be subsidized to bring down prices and encourage personal subscriptions. Only one academic at each university proposed electronic publication.

Changes 1996/1998

11. Changes in importance, use, identification and access:

In general		African
UGL	UNZA	UGL	UNZA
Importance
68%	70%	56%	55%	No change
14%	25%	26%	45%	More important in the future
9%	0%	11%	0%	More important
5%	5%	4%	0%	Less important
Use
32%	45%	54%	60%	No change
49%	25%	23%	25%	More use
18%	25%	19%	10%	Less use
Identification and access
33%	55%	49%	55%	No change
33%	15%	14%	5%	Easier
30%	25%	37%	35%	Harder

The situation, on the whole, had not changed. Use of journals in general had increased, because the World Bank and other donor projects had provided subscriptions. But it was pointed out that access and availability remained the key problems. If they were solved, then importance and use would increase. Many staff remained pessimistic and considered that identification and access had become harder over the last three years. For some, especially at UNZA, the introduction of electronic means during the past three years had gone some way to improving access. But staff in Medicine, in particular, (45%) were finding it increasingly difficult to obtain copies of journal articles.

Citation analysis

The analysis of citations was undertaken to give some indication of the extent to which journals and, in particular African-published journals, were used in research. The journal citations in undergraduate final year projects, postgraduate theses and academic staff publications (e.g. journal articles, books, research reports, conference papers) produced during each academic year were examined. Citations made were analyzed by journal title and number of times that an issue was cited. In 1997, dates of citations were also examined, so as to give an idea of the currency of journals being used in research. UGL provided this information in 1997 and both universities in 1998.

12. Undergraduate final year projects

UGL		UNZA
Arts	Soc. St.	Ag. Sci.	Medicine
2.6	6.2	3.6	3.2	Average number of journal citations per project
31%	26%	21%	24%	% of African-published journal citations
58%	82%	7%	16%	% of African-published journal citations which were Ghanaian/Zambian
30%	35%	15%	n/a	% of journal citations 1990+
38%	39%	0%	n/a	% of African-published journal citations, 1990+

13. Postgraduate theses

UGL		UNZA
Arts	Soc. St.	Ag. Sci.	Medicine
6.3	13.1	17	15.5	Average number of journal citations per project
37%	20%	5%	18%	% of African-published journal citations
66%	76%	27%	24%	% of African-published journal citations which were Ghanaian/Zambian
30%	25%	18%	71%	% of journal citations 1990+
20%	29%	33%	44%	% of African-published journal citations, 1990+

14. Academic staff publications

UGL		UNZA
Arts	Soc. St.	Ag. Sci.	Medicine
2.9	3.9	15.4	17.3	Average number of journal citations per project
26%	29%	7%	7%	% of African-published journal citations
61%	57%	1%	25%	% of African-published journal citations which were Ghanaian/Zambian
28%	33%	29%	68%	% of journal citations 1990+
37%	34%	100%	100%	% of African-published journal citations, 1990+

Library count of journal use

The objective of the library count was to find out the extent to which journals were used on a daily basis and whether this use was of current issues or back files. A count was made of journals taken from the shelves and left on the reading tables at the end of each hour every day for one week each year. The titles, issue numbers and dates were noted so that African-published journals could be differentiated from non-African and current from back files.

15. All journals

UGL	UNZA Main Library	UNZA Medical Library
88	55	23	Number of titles used during one week
119	86	80	Number of issues used during one week
130	121	279	Number of times a journal used during one week
75%	10%	41%	Percentage of issues used which were current (1996+)
22	19	45	Average number of times a journal used each day

16. African-published journals

UGL	UNZA Main Library	UNZA Medical Library
9	7	3	Number of titles used during one week
12	8	17	Number of issues used during one week
13	10	62	Number of times a journal used during one week
39%	30%	57%	Percentage of issues used which were current (1996+)
2	2	12	Average number of times a journal used each day

Unlike the UGL and UNZA main libraries, usage in the Medical Library in both 1997 and 1998 concentrated on a small number of titles and issues, used many times. In 1997, 72 issues of the British Journal of Surgery were used 196 times during the week and 39 issues of the East African Medical Journal 118 times. In 1998, the most popular non-African journals were the British Medical Journal, Lancet and Australian and New Zealand Journal of Surgery. The two African titles used were the East African Medical Journal and the Zambia Health Information Digest. One issue of the latter was used 30 times.