Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16671
J. Joorel, Abhishek Kumar, Hiteshkumar Solanki, R. V, Dharmesh Shah, P. Pradhan, Kruti Trivedi, Priyanka Singh
India Rankings i.e. National Institution Ranking Framework (NIRF) started in 2015 and completed its fifth year of yearly exercise in 2020. This article is based on evolutionary study of India Rankings. The study highlights the life cycle of India Rankings including different disciplines and their framework. It also focuses on how the framework is being matured year by year on the basis of availability of data in Institutions. There were several changes / deviations that happened due to non-availability of data or garbage data entered by the Institutes.
{"title":"Five Years of India Rankings 2016 2020 an Evolutionary Study","authors":"J. Joorel, Abhishek Kumar, Hiteshkumar Solanki, R. V, Dharmesh Shah, P. Pradhan, Kruti Trivedi, Priyanka Singh","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16671","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16671","url":null,"abstract":"India Rankings i.e. National Institution Ranking Framework (NIRF) started in 2015 and completed its fifth year of yearly exercise in 2020. This article is based on evolutionary study of India Rankings. The study highlights the life cycle of India Rankings including different disciplines and their framework. It also focuses on how the framework is being matured year by year on the basis of availability of data in Institutions. There were several changes / deviations that happened due to non-availability of data or garbage data entered by the Institutes.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"42-48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46520875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16459
Pradeepa Wijetunge
The objective of this study is to investigate the research productivity of the Sri Lankan state universities depicted in reputed international university ranking systems during 2015-2020 and to identify the areas that can be used to develop the research productivity of the state universities. Research–related scores of the Sri Lankan state universities from 2015-2020 in four ranking systems (THE, QS, SIR, and URAP) were analysed. The study established that the research productivity, impact, and collaboration are the major aspects considered by the ranking systems. Only a few universities are ranked and the scores have a considerable scope to be improved. Several recommendations are made on how the university librarians can support the improvement of research-related related rankings. This is the first study on research productivity scores of Sri Lankan state universities based on international ranking systems. Hence the findings will be useful for the university policymakers in Sri Lanka as well in other countries with similar educational contexts.
{"title":"Research Productivity of Sri Lankan Universities in the International Ranking Systems and Mandatory Contribution of Librarians","authors":"Pradeepa Wijetunge","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16459","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16459","url":null,"abstract":"The objective of this study is to investigate the research productivity of the Sri Lankan state universities depicted in reputed international university ranking systems during 2015-2020 and to identify the areas that can be used to develop the research productivity of the state universities. Research–related scores of the Sri Lankan state universities from 2015-2020 in four ranking systems (THE, QS, SIR, and URAP) were analysed. The study established that the research productivity, impact, and collaboration are the major aspects considered by the ranking systems. Only a few universities are ranked and the scores have a considerable scope to be improved. Several recommendations are made on how the university librarians can support the improvement of research-related related rankings. This is the first study on research productivity scores of Sri Lankan state universities based on international ranking systems. Hence the findings will be useful for the university policymakers in Sri Lanka as well in other countries with similar educational contexts.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"54-60"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48673761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16675
A. K. Nassa, Jagdish Arora, Priyanka Singh, J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Kruti Trivedi
This article analyses data on five years of India rankings to assess its impact on performance parameters of institutions of higher education on four (out of five) broad categories of parameters, namely i) Teaching, Learning and Resources; ii) Graduation Outcome; iii) Outreach and Inclusivity; and iv) Perception. The analysis on data on four years of India Rankings, i.e. 2017 to 2020 on various performance parameters of HEIs in engineering discipline provides an interesting insight and reveals that participating institutions are making strenuous effort to improve their performance on various parameters or sub-parameters identified under NIRF. The analyses reflect that performance of remaining eligible institutions has improved on most of the ranking parameters in comparison to the100 topranked institutions over a period of four years of ranking, i.e. from 2017 to 2020.
{"title":"Five Years of India Rankings and its Impact on Performance Parameters of Engineering Educational Institutions in India Pt1 Teaching Learning and Resources Graduate Outcome Outreach and Inclusivity and Perception","authors":"A. K. Nassa, Jagdish Arora, Priyanka Singh, J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Kruti Trivedi","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16675","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16675","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses data on five years of India rankings to assess its impact on performance parameters of institutions of higher education on four (out of five) broad categories of parameters, namely i) Teaching, Learning and Resources; ii) Graduation Outcome; iii) Outreach and Inclusivity; and iv) Perception. The analysis on data on four years of India Rankings, i.e. 2017 to 2020 on various performance parameters of HEIs in engineering discipline provides an interesting insight and reveals that participating institutions are making strenuous effort to improve their performance on various parameters or sub-parameters identified under NIRF. The analyses reflect that performance of remaining eligible institutions has improved on most of the ranking parameters in comparison to the100 topranked institutions over a period of four years of ranking, i.e. from 2017 to 2020.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"20-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43381915","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16328
Sheeba Pakkan, C. Sudhakar, Shubham Tripathi, M. Rao
It is a general trend that higher education institutions must undergo one or more ranking agencies evaluation to get reputed in the field of education. Institutions must have a place in the ranking to attract students, faculty and even for successful foreign student exchange programs. Prominence in research is an important parameter to scale the eminence of an institution. A quantum of quality publications is one of the factors judging the prevailing research environment of an institution. While doing an institutional level evaluation on research output, we always go for quantitative measures like total publication, citation and h-index. In the present scenario, the institution must set to have a strategy in achieving ambitious scientific goals. This paper presents some innovative analysis of research data by choosing valuable metrics. The samples selected for the study are the top-ranked institutions in India. The same approach can be applied to any institutions in the world for evaluation and excellence. We have done qualitativequantitative analysis using different parameters of research output to explain the importance of various metrics. The present study has identified metrics which can be considered seriously to achieve better performance in research output. It is a fused index metrics which explains along with Scholarly Output, the importance of Cited and Uncited Publications and different types of Collaborations and its impact on the overall performance of an institution.
{"title":"Quest for Ranking Excellence Impact Study of Research Metrics","authors":"Sheeba Pakkan, C. Sudhakar, Shubham Tripathi, M. Rao","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16328","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16328","url":null,"abstract":"It is a general trend that higher education institutions must undergo one or more ranking agencies evaluation to get reputed in the field of education. Institutions must have a place in the ranking to attract students, faculty and even for successful foreign student exchange programs. Prominence in research is an important parameter to scale the eminence of an institution. A quantum of quality publications is one of the factors judging the prevailing research environment of an institution. While doing an institutional level evaluation on research output, we always go for quantitative measures like total publication, citation and h-index. In the present scenario, the institution must set to have a strategy in achieving ambitious scientific goals. This paper presents some innovative analysis of research data by choosing valuable metrics. The samples selected for the study are the top-ranked institutions in India. The same approach can be applied to any institutions in the world for evaluation and excellence. We have done qualitativequantitative analysis using different parameters of research output to explain the importance of various metrics. The present study has identified metrics which can be considered seriously to achieve better performance in research output. It is a fused index metrics which explains along with Scholarly Output, the importance of Cited and Uncited Publications and different types of Collaborations and its impact on the overall performance of an institution.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"61-69"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47249914","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16670
J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Dharmesh Shah, R. V, Kruti Trivedi, P. Pradhan, Priyanka Singh
The India Rankings 2020 was announced the 5th annual edition of ranking for higher educational institutions in India based on National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF). The impact of NIRF among institutions is progressive on their output, outcomes, and outreach to the society. The government of India is also concentrating on several policy decisions in the education sector based on the results of India Rankings. This paper is focused on the study of Research Performance (RP) parameter on India Rankings while expanding five-years window instead of three-years window. Moreover, the study is also focused on Pearson correlation between three-years research performance score and five-years RP score and weighted score of institutions. It is attempted to derive the Spearman rank correlation between RP rank and overall rank based on all parameters score.
{"title":"Impact of Expanding Window from Three Years to Five Years for Research Performance Parameter in India Rankings","authors":"J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Dharmesh Shah, R. V, Kruti Trivedi, P. Pradhan, Priyanka Singh","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16670","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16670","url":null,"abstract":"The India Rankings 2020 was announced the 5th annual edition of ranking for higher educational institutions in India based on National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF). The impact of NIRF among institutions is progressive on their output, outcomes, and outreach to the society. The government of India is also concentrating on several policy decisions in the education sector based on the results of India Rankings. This paper is focused on the study of Research Performance (RP) parameter on India Rankings while expanding five-years window instead of three-years window. Moreover, the study is also focused on Pearson correlation between three-years research performance score and five-years RP score and weighted score of institutions. It is attempted to derive the Spearman rank correlation between RP rank and overall rank based on all parameters score.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"37-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44824874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16683
Priyanka Singh, J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Kruti Trivedi
This article ranks the same set of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in India using four different ranking methodologies, namely, i) NIRF (Overall): used for Overall category of India Rankings; ii) NIRF (Only Research and Professional Practices parameters); iii) Research Ranking Methodology; a new methodology evolved for ranking of research-intensive institutions under NIRF; and vi) IFQ2A index developed by Spanish group of scientists. The four sets of ranked institutions were obtained using methodologies mentioned above and correlation analysis was carried out on these four sets using Pearson Bivariate Correlation. It was found that a very strong and positive correlation exists between ranking of HEIs using new methodology (R2M) evolved for ranking of research-intensive institutions and ranking by HEIs using IFQ2A Index.
{"title":"Ranking of Indian Research Intensive Higher Education Institutions using Multiple Ranking Methodologies a Correlation Analysis","authors":"Priyanka Singh, J. Joorel, Hiteshkumar Solanki, Abhishek Kumar, Kruti Trivedi","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16683","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16683","url":null,"abstract":"This article ranks the same set of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in India using four different ranking methodologies, namely, i) NIRF (Overall): used for Overall category of India Rankings; ii) NIRF (Only Research and Professional Practices parameters); iii) Research Ranking Methodology; a new methodology evolved for ranking of research-intensive institutions under NIRF; and vi) IFQ2A index developed by Spanish group of scientists. The four sets of ranked institutions were obtained using methodologies mentioned above and correlation analysis was carried out on these four sets using Pearson Bivariate Correlation. It was found that a very strong and positive correlation exists between ranking of HEIs using new methodology (R2M) evolved for ranking of research-intensive institutions and ranking by HEIs using IFQ2A Index.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"49-53"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46278093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-02-11DOI: 10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16757
A. K. Nassa, Jagdish Arora
Ranking of higher education institutions (HEI) is a convenient and easily understandable method of evaluation and assessment. An ordinal number assigned to an HEI by a ranking system represents its comparative position in a list of ranked institutions based on marks obtained by it on various performance parameters or indicators. Ranking of HEIs have been lauded and criticised simultaneously. University rankings are often criticised for methodology used, choice of indicators and weightage assigned to them, focus on science, technology and English language publications, assessment of institutions as whole (instead of individual program) and the practice of assigning an ordinal number or a rank to represent quality of an HEI. At the same time, university rankings are lauded for serving as information tools for students, researchers, funding agencies, policy makers and other stakeholders as well as for instilling a competitive spirit amongst institutions to perform better in ranking systems. However, most experts agree that rankings are here to stay in the education market place. As such, although ranking system cannot measure quality of education and research in absolute term, it does serve as indicator to various aspects of quality in higher education, which, in turn, can be used by institutions themselves for improving their performance on these parameters. While universities are welcomed to use rankings for improving their performance, ranking systems should not dictate university policy, either at a national or institutional level, but should be used as a source of information for guiding policies that should be decided according to the needs of the university’s own community, traditions, market niche, national role and so on1.
{"title":"Ranking of Institutions of Higher Education","authors":"A. K. Nassa, Jagdish Arora","doi":"10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16757","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/DJLIT.41.1.16757","url":null,"abstract":"Ranking of higher education institutions (HEI) is a convenient and easily understandable method of evaluation and assessment. An ordinal number assigned to an HEI by a ranking system represents its comparative position in a list of ranked institutions based on marks obtained by it on various performance parameters or indicators. Ranking of HEIs have been lauded and criticised simultaneously. University rankings are often criticised for methodology used, choice of indicators and weightage assigned to them, focus on science, technology and English language publications, assessment of institutions as whole (instead of individual program) and the practice of assigning an ordinal number or a rank to represent quality of an HEI. At the same time, university rankings are lauded for serving as information tools for students, researchers, funding agencies, policy makers and other stakeholders as well as for instilling a competitive spirit amongst institutions to perform better in ranking systems. However, most experts agree that rankings are here to stay in the education market place. As such, although ranking system cannot measure quality of education and research in absolute term, it does serve as indicator to various aspects of quality in higher education, which, in turn, can be used by institutions themselves for improving their performance on these parameters. While universities are welcomed to use rankings for improving their performance, ranking systems should not dictate university policy, either at a national or institutional level, but should be used as a source of information for guiding policies that should be decided according to the needs of the university’s own community, traditions, market niche, national role and so on1.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"41 1","pages":"3-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47118851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.14429/djlit.41.5.16438
Ramkrushna Rajaram Kamble, P. H. Barad
This article focused a selective review of literature on the role of libraries on educational; social & cultural; economical and political development under the title ‘A selective Review of Literature on Social Contribution of Libraries’. Libraries are changing their nature in the modern age and they offer their services to the user from various requirements of them and play a very important role in society. The library is considered as the heart of an educational institution as well as plays a role as the backbone of an educational institution. And also by offering various services, these libraries added value to education, social & cultural, economic, and political development. In this paper, the literature published on the social contribution of libraries is studied, analysed and, explained. The social contribution of libraries is crucial in the educational, social & cultural, economic and, political development of the nation. From this article scholars and researchers can understand how libraries play the important role in society and also aware of the literature available in this area.
{"title":"A Selective Review of Literature on Social Contribution of Libraries","authors":"Ramkrushna Rajaram Kamble, P. H. Barad","doi":"10.14429/djlit.41.5.16438","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.5.16438","url":null,"abstract":"This article focused a selective review of literature on the role of libraries on educational; social & cultural; economical and political development under the title ‘A selective Review of Literature on Social Contribution of Libraries’. Libraries are changing their nature in the modern age and they offer their services to the user from various requirements of them and play a very important role in society. The library is considered as the heart of an educational institution as well as plays a role as the backbone of an educational institution. And also by offering various services, these libraries added value to education, social & cultural, economic, and political development. In this paper, the literature published on the social contribution of libraries is studied, analysed and, explained. The social contribution of libraries is crucial in the educational, social & cultural, economic and, political development of the nation. From this article scholars and researchers can understand how libraries play the important role in society and also aware of the literature available in this area.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67016159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.14429/djlit.41.5.16399
M. Verma, R. Shukla
This paper highlights the comparison of information literacy skills among the master’s students of social sciences departments of Mizoram University (MZU) and Tezpur University (TZU). The primary data collected by using survey method and a structured 595 questionnaires were distributed among the respondents in which 522 (87.73 %) of questionnaires were received. The majority of the respondents were female in both the universities in compared to male respondents. Mizoram Universty students have more awareness of using library services in comparison to Tezpur University respondents. It has been also found that there is no significant difference in the information literacy skills of the students of both the Universities. Mizoram University students preferred ‘author-wise’ i.e. (59.32 %) search while Tezpur University students preferred ‘title-wise’ i.e. (39.38 %) search technique for searching the information. It has been also found that a maximum respondents of both universities i.e. (MZU, 55.97 %) and (TZU, 54.75 %) preferred the simple keyword search technique to search the electronic information. The maximum students of both universities were preferred print media for fulfil their needed information. In both of the Universities’ respondents were aware with fair use of information and plagiarism with 79.09 per cent of students at MZU and 84.5 per cent of students at TZU. The maximum 39.16 per cent of students were mostly given the references at MZU while in TZU, a large number 57.53 per cent of students were always giving references when they reproduce other work or ideas. Based on a two-sample t-test, as p<0.05, it was found that no significant difference in the information literacy skills of the students of both the Universities. After testing with Scheffe’s test, it has been shown that the mean of the satisfaction level of respondents was significantly different (P <.05) as the absolute value of the calculated t is smaller than the critical value (0.0737<2.201), which shows that there is no significant difference in the satisfaction level of students of both the Universities towards their library orientation program on the use of library resources and services.
{"title":"Information Literacy Skills among the Masters Students of Social Sciences Departments of Mizoram University and Tezpur University A Comparative Study","authors":"M. Verma, R. Shukla","doi":"10.14429/djlit.41.5.16399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.5.16399","url":null,"abstract":"This paper highlights the comparison of information literacy skills among the master’s students of social sciences departments of Mizoram University (MZU) and Tezpur University (TZU). The primary data collected by using survey method and a structured 595 questionnaires were distributed among the respondents in which 522 (87.73 %) of questionnaires were received. The majority of the respondents were female in both the universities in compared to male respondents. Mizoram Universty students have more awareness of using library services in comparison to Tezpur University respondents. It has been also found that there is no significant difference in the information literacy skills of the students of both the Universities. Mizoram University students preferred ‘author-wise’ i.e. (59.32 %) search while Tezpur University students preferred ‘title-wise’ i.e. (39.38 %) search technique for searching the information. It has been also found that a maximum respondents of both universities i.e. (MZU, 55.97 %) and (TZU, 54.75 %) preferred the simple keyword search technique to search the electronic information. The maximum students of both universities were preferred print media for fulfil their needed information. In both of the Universities’ respondents were aware with fair use of information and plagiarism with 79.09 per cent of students at MZU and 84.5 per cent of students at TZU. The maximum 39.16 per cent of students were mostly given the references at MZU while in TZU, a large number 57.53 per cent of students were always giving references when they reproduce other work or ideas. Based on a two-sample t-test, as p<0.05, it was found that no significant difference in the information literacy skills of the students of both the Universities. After testing with Scheffe’s test, it has been shown that the mean of the satisfaction level of respondents was significantly different (P <.05) as the absolute value of the calculated t is smaller than the critical value (0.0737<2.201), which shows that there is no significant difference in the satisfaction level of students of both the Universities towards their library orientation program on the use of library resources and services.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67016517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-01-01DOI: 10.14429/djlit.41.5.16452
Amit Kumar, Kuldeep Singh, A. Siwach
National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) was launched on 29 September 2015 by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India to rank the academic & research institutions across the country. The NIRF E-release of India Ranking 2020 was held on 11th June 2020. The present study analyses the top 100 Universities in terms of visualisation of data, the relationship of ranking with the parameters, and the relations among these parameters. Results of the study indicate that the Teaching, Learning & Resources (TLR) score for all the universities was almost similar while Research and Professional Practice (RP) score had a considerable variation and played a significant role in ranking by having a positive linear correlation with the total score with the value of R2= 0.746. RP also has a strong correlation with the Peer Perception (PR) of the university. The average library expenditure of top-10 universities was 9.45 crore per annum. It was also found that library expenditure has a positive correlation with RP and the universities with higher research productivity also have a more outstanding quality of publication in terms of citations.
{"title":"NIRF India Rankings 2020 Analyzing the Ranking Parameters and Score of Top 100 Universities","authors":"Amit Kumar, Kuldeep Singh, A. Siwach","doi":"10.14429/djlit.41.5.16452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14429/djlit.41.5.16452","url":null,"abstract":"National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF) was launched on 29 September 2015 by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India to rank the academic & research institutions across the country. The NIRF E-release of India Ranking 2020 was held on 11th June 2020. The present study analyses the top 100 Universities in terms of visualisation of data, the relationship of ranking with the parameters, and the relations among these parameters. Results of the study indicate that the Teaching, Learning & Resources (TLR) score for all the universities was almost similar while Research and Professional Practice (RP) score had a considerable variation and played a significant role in ranking by having a positive linear correlation with the total score with the value of R2= 0.746. RP also has a strong correlation with the Peer Perception (PR) of the university. The average library expenditure of top-10 universities was 9.45 crore per annum. It was also found that library expenditure has a positive correlation with RP and the universities with higher research productivity also have a more outstanding quality of publication in terms of citations.","PeriodicalId":44921,"journal":{"name":"DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"67016186","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：