Academic Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/AWARENESS-AND-USAGE-OF-OPEN-ACCESS-RESO 👈

1. AWARENESS AND USAGE OF OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES
AMONG RESEARCH SCHOLARS OF BHARATHIDASAN
UNIVERSITY: A STUDY
A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF
MASTER DEGREE
IN
LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
By
G.JAYANTHI
Reg. No: 1OMLS02
SUPERVISOR
MR. B. JEYAPRAGASH
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION SCIENCE
BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY
TIRUCHIRAPPALLI – 620 024, INDIA.
APRIL 2012
DECLARATION

2. I hereby declare that the project “AWARENESS AND USAGE OF OPEN
ACCESS RESOURCES AMONG RESEARCH SCHOLARS OF
BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY: A STUDY”, which is being submitted in
partial fulfillment of the course requirements leading to the award of Master of
Library and Information Science, is the result of the work carried out by me under the
guidance and supervision of Mr. B. Jeyapragash.
I further declare that this project has not been previously prepared and
submitted to any other institution/university for any degree/diploma by me or any
other person.
Place: Trichy (JAYANTHI.G)
Date:

3. CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Project entitled “AWARENESS AND USAGE OF
OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES AMONG RESEARCH SCHOLARS OF
BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY: A STUDY”, submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the award of the Master degree in Library and Information
Science, Bharathidasan University, is a record of bonafide project work carried out
by G.JAYANTHI (Reg. No:10MLS02) under my supervision and guidance and no
part of this work has been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma.
B. JEYAPRAGASH
Assistant Professor,
Department of Library and
Information Science,
Bharathidasan University,
Tiruchirappalli – 620 024.
Tamilnadu, India.
Dr. S. SRINIVASA RAGAVAN
Associate Professor and Head,
Department of Library and
Information Science,
Bharathidasan University,
Tiruchirappalli – 620 024.
Tamilnadu, India.

4. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank Dr. S. Srinivasa Ragavan, Associate Professor & Head, Department of
Library & Information Science, Bharathidasan University, for encouragement throughout my project.
I am very glad to express my sincere gratitude to Mr. B.JEYAPRAGASH, Assistant
Professsor, Department of Library and Information Science, Bharathidasan University, for his guidance
and encouragement throughout my project.
.
I am very much thankful to Assistant Professors Mr. M. Surulinathi, Mr. C.
Ranganathan, Dr. R. Balasubramani, Dr. N. Amsaveni and Technical officers Mr. B.
Neelakandan, Mrs. C. Kokila, and Mrs. P. Jayanthi helping me for complete the project
successfully.
I thank my family members and friends for their valuable suggestions to complete this project
successfully on time.
Place: Trichy
Date: (JAYANTHI.G)
4

5. CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
S.No Table P.No
01 Data Analysis 37
02 Awareness On Open Access Resources By Research 38
5
CHAPTER CONTENT PAGE NO.
I INTRODUCTION 1
II REVIEW OF LITERATURE 21
III RESEARCH DESIGN 34
IV ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 36
V FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION 65
BIBLIOGRAPHY 67

6. Scholars
03 Awareness On Open Access Resources By Programmes 39
04 Awareness On Open Access Resources By Gender 41
05 Awareness On Open Access Resources By Subject 43
06 Awareness On Open Access Resources By Nativity 44
07 Usage On Open Access Resources By Programme 45
08 Usage On Open Access Resources By Gender 47
09 Usage On Open Access Resources By Subject 48
10 Usage On Open Access Resources By Nativity 50
11 Open Access Literacy Tools By Programmes 51
12 Open Access Literacy Tools By Gender 52
13 Open Access Literacy Tools By Subject 54
14 Open Access Literacy Tools By Nativity 55
15 Barriers On Open Access Resources By Programmes 57
16 Barriers On Open Access Resources By Gender 59
17 Barriers On Open Access Resources By Subject 61
18 Barriers On Open Access Resources By Nativity 63
6

7. LIST OF FIGURES
S.No Figure P.No
01
DOAJ - Directory of Open Access
Journals
14
02
NPTEL-National Programme on
Technology Enhanced Learning
15
03
NDLTD – Networked Digital Library
of Theses and Dissertations
16
04
OAJSE –Open Access Journal Search
Engine
17
05 Open J-Gate 18
06 SHODHGANGA 19
CHAPTER-I
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Open access to scholarly information is a burning issue in web based education and research
nowadays. Open access has become an increasingly important and potentially divisive issue in recent
years as journal inflation rates have increased. For many librarians and scholars, journal price inflation
is itself the central problem and open access is the solution. Open Access holds promise to remove both
price and permission barriers to the scientific communication by using Internet. In fact, ‘Open access’
(OA) is a step ahead of “Free Access” which removes just the price barriers by providing free access to
end users. Open Access removes the permission barrier as well. In other words, under Open Access,
the end-user not only has free access to the content but also have the right to further distribute the
content.
7

8. Open access (OA) is a method of electronic publishing that allows anyone with an internet
connection to gain access to an entire published work online at no cost and free of most copyright &
licensing restrictions.
The technological revolutions have become order of the days. Information technology is a
label that reflects the consequence of several streams of technical developments including
microelectronics, computer science, telecommunication, software engineering and system analysis. It is
a technology that dramatically increases the ability to record, store, analysis and transmit the
information. Fast changing curricula and frequent introducing as new subjects impose a great demand
on the system in general. Indian universities need to be given the required threat to enter the third
millennium withal leading edge. Technology is a driving force in the contemporary education system.
Online publication has now become easy than before with the advent of information and
communication technology (ICT). ICT also persuade to exchange the way of information
professionals’ work. Library websites are becoming the place for content creation and publication.
Major libraries are setting up their websites as portal for all services and using as a marketing tool to
attract users. Library users value timely dissemination of information above library activities and
services through library websites.
Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and
licensing restrictions. What make it possible are the internet and the consent of the author or copyright-
holder.
In most fields, scholarly journals do not pay authors, who can therefore consent to OA
without losing revenue. In this respect scholars and scientists are very differently situated from most
musicians and movie-makers, and controversies about OA to music and movies do not carry over to
research literature.
8

9. OA literature is not free to produce, even if it is less expensive to produce than conventionally
published literature. The question is not whether scholarly literature can be made costless, but whether
there are better ways to pay the bills than by charging readers and creating access barriers. Business
models for paying the bills depend on how OA is delivered.
OA is entirely compatible with peer review, and all the major OA initiatives for scientific and
scholarly literature insist on its importance. Just as authors of journal articles donate their labor, so do
most journal editors and referees participating in peer review.
Open Source and repositories—used in this paper to mean digital collections capturing and
preserving the intellectual output of a university community. While institutional repositories necessitate
that libraries—as their logical administrative proponents facilitate development of university
intellectual property policies, encourage faculty authors to retain the right to self-archive, and broaden
both faculty and administration perspectives on these issues.
1.2 History for Open Access
The Open Access coalition was formed in Q4 1999. The members issued a request-for-
technology for existing technology, looking for a solution that was proven and would be commercially
adopted, and that supported a broad set of EDA tools. As a result, the Cadence Genesis database and
API was selected and now forms the technology base for Open Access.
In order to make scholarly information more accessible and affordable, a number of
alternatives, made possible with the technology of the internet, have been proposed. Some of them fall
within the definition of what is called Open Access. In 2002, the Budapest Open Access Initiative
defined open access as the "world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature,
9

10. completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other
curious minds." Obviously such publishing, like all publishing, has a cost. As such, someone other than
the reader (or the reader's library) would pay for the publication-and much of the discussion so far has
been how that cost might be paid for.
For a full timeline of Open Access events up to the end of 2007, see Peter Suber's
history of Open Access timeline. This timeline lists events in OA up to 2009. For an updated timeline
of OA events, see the Open Access Directory (OAD) Wiki.
1.3 Definition
 “ In using the term 'open access', we mean the free availability of peer-reviewed literature on
the public internet, permitting any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link
to the full texts of the articles.”
 “By open access, we mean its immediate, free availability on the public internet, permitting any
users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full text of these articles,
crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software or use them for any other lawful
purpose…” (Budapest).
 Open access resources are scholarly literature that is "digital, online, free of charge, and free
of most copyright and licensing restrictions." This means that the material is available
without a subscription charge for anyone to read, download, copy, distribute, print, display and
10

11. modify. A goal of open access is anyone with access to the Internet can find and use, to the
fullest capacity, any open access publication. (Peter Suber)
 Open-access resources are those that can be accessed by anyone at any time without restraint.
When the resource is abundant relative to the demand for it, an open-access regime may not
only be unproblematic, it may actually be the best management regime since it involves so little
oversight. (International Encyclopedia of Information….2006).
1.4 Concept of Open Access Resources
 Open Access literature is free online for anyone, anywhere, to read, download, and use,
providing that the author is properly cited. To be fully open access, literature must be reel
available as soon as it is published, if not before (as a preprint).
 Open Access is an obvious choice for works that authors have traditionally given away, such as
scholarly, peer-reviewed journal articles, the focus of the open access movement. Open Access
makes sense for other materials too, such as government documents, theses, and conference
proceedings.
 Open access publishing, and self-archiving of articles in open access archives. Strong
communities influence user behaviors – users come back to the repository.
 You would own, not merely license, your own copies of electronic journals.
 You would have the right to archive them forever without special permission or periodic
payments. Long-term preservation and access would not be limited to the actions taken by
publishers, with future market potential in mind, but could be supplemented by independent
library actions.
11

12.  If publishers did not migrate older content, such as the back runs of journals, to new media and
formats to keep them readable as technology changed, then libraries would have the right to do
it on their own.
1.5 Features of Open Access
 Establishment of “a new generation of journals,” that do not charge subscription or access fees
(known as the “gold” road),
 Author self-archiving and/or commitment to deposit a digital copy of a publication to a publicly
accessible Website (known as the “green” road)
 Open access literature is digital, free of charge and free of copyrightOA is compatible with
copyright, peer review, revenue, print, preservation, prestige, and career.
 Advancement, indexing and supportive services associated with conventional scholarly
literature.
 OA campaign focuses on the literature that authors give to the world without expectation of
payment OA literature is not free to produce or publish.
 OA is compatible with peer review and all the major OA initiative for scientific and scholarly
literature insist on its importance.
 Allows customer choice of best-of-breed tools
 Allows customer to dictate the design flow Promotes EDA tool competition
 Provides global enterprise and cooperative design sharing
 Enhances technology-transfer of university research.
12

13. 1.6 Models of Open Access
 Developing an open access model is a critical concern of publishers considering open access
distribution. Selecting the model(s) appropriate to a particular journal will depend not only on
the expense hurdle that must be cleared, but also on the publisher’s mission objectives, size,
business management resources, risk tolerance, tax status, and institutional or corporate
affiliation.
 This guide provides an overview of income models currently being used to support the open-
access distribution of peer-reviewed scholarly and scientific journals.
 It is intended for any publisher that seeks to launch an open-access journal or to convert an
existing journal to open-access distribution. Such publishers include independent, single-title
operations, operated by a founding editor with volunteer support; society publishers of all sizes,
including single- and multiple-title publishing programs; and conventional publishers, both
commercial and nonprofit. It is important to remember this broad range of publisher types when
reviewing the income models described here. Some of the models require management and
marketing resources beyond those available to small or informal operations. Conversely, some
models might prove incongruous or ineffective if applied by a large commercial publisher.
 A publisher might explore open-access alternatives to a subscription model for a variety of
reasons.
 These include:
 To increase access to its published research by lowering or eliminating market barriers to the
content;
13

14.  To maximize market reach and support a new journal launch when the market will not support a
traditional subscription model; or to implement a supply-side model (discussed below) in
response to funder-mandated content deposit policies.
 The Replacement model, where OER (Open Education Resources) replaces other use and can
benefit from the cost savings which is a result of the replacement. It was noted though that this
model has a natural limit since it can only generate the same amount of resources as it replaces.
 The Foundation, Donation or Endowment model, where the funding for the operations are
Provided by an external actor such as foundations. This model was primarily seen as a start up
model that will most probably not be viable in the long run. It might be transferred into a
Government support model, which could be a long-term option in some (mostly European?)
Countries but not others.
 The Segmentation model, where the provider, simultaneously with resources for free, also
provides “value-added” services to user segments and charges them for these services – such as
sales of paper copies, training and user support, ask-an-expert services etc. This model, together
with the conversion model, is among the most used in the education sector.
 The Conversion model, where “you give something away for free and then convert the
consumer to a paying customer”.
 The Voluntary support model, which is based on fund-raising campaigns. Another version of
this model is the Membership model where a coalition of interested parties – organizations or
individuals – is invited to contribute a certain sum as seed money or on an annual basis.
.
1.7 Advantages of open access resources
14

15.  Open Access means there is greater visibility and accessibility, and thus impact from scholarly
Endeavour
 Open access means there is more rapid and more efficient progress of scholarly research
 Open Access means there can be better assessment, better monitoring and better management of
science
 Open Access means that novel information can be created using new computational technologies.
1.8 Initiative of Open Access in national and international Level
1.8.1 National Level
India: Open-access publishing enables researchers in developing countries to establish priority for
their research, which they could use later to defend their intellectual property. It removes excess
barriers in terms of both price and permission, enhances national research capacity, and improves
visibility for developing-country research. Open access thus enables a global platform for this
research and collaboration and reciprocates the information flow among the countries.
Indian Academy of Sciences:
The learned scientific society with its aim of promoting progress and upholding the cause of
science in pure and applied branches publishes 11 journals in all front-line scientific disciplines. It has
taken the lead in India in providing open access to Indian research by making available the electronic
versions of its journals over the Internet. The Academy feels that open access to research literature
achieves a quick impact and makes quality articles much more visible. Retrospective digitization of
15

16. back files is complete and they are accessible. Unlike the open access journals of some of international
publishers, the Indian Academy of Sciences does not charge authors for publishing their papers. The
cost of publishing is met by government funding and subscriptions to their print journals.
E-print archives of Indian Institute of Science:
EPrints@IISc repository collects, preserves and disseminates in digital format the research
output created by the IISc research community. It can be accessed by anybody but the submission of
documents is limited to the IISc research community. It was set up by using eprint.org open source
software. The website also supports metadata for browsing and searching. It can be browsed by subject,
year, author, e-print type, and keyword and by latest addition.
E-print archives of IISc is an online digital repository of research papers, both preprints and
post prints, technical reports, unpublished findings and journal articles of the faculty.
Journal of Indian Institute of Science
This journal is published by Indian Institute of Science. It is now available online along with its
back issues since 1914.
Digital repository of Theses and Dissertations of Indian Institute of Science.
It is a joint service of National Centre for Science Information (NCSI) and IISc Library.
BioLine international
This is a collaborative initiative of scientists and librarians of the University of Toronto
Libraries, Canada, Brazil, and Bioline, UK. It is a non-profit electronic publishing service committed to
providing open access to quality bioscience research published in developing countries. It makes
16

17. available published information from peer-reviewed journals from Brazil, Cuba, India, Indonesia,
Kenya, South Africa, and Zimbabwe via the Internet.
Indian Meddlers Center
This is an initiative by the National Informatics Center (NIC) and Indian Council of Medical
Research (ICMR), two governmental agencies. The center has developed indMED, a bibliographic
database of peer reviewed Indian biomedical journals. MedIND (http://medind.nic.in/) is the full-text
archive for 28 peer-reviewed Indian Biomedical journals indexed in indMED.
NISCAIR (National Institute of Science Communication and Information Resources)
Journals
This is an effort by the government-funded Council of Scientific and Industrial Research
(CSIR) (http:// www.niscom.res.in/ScienceCommunication). The publication wing of CSIR, NISCAIR,
brings out 11 research journals in different S&T disciplines. Though full text is not currently available
online, bibliographic information and abstracts can be accessed and searched.
Indian Theses database
The Indian Theses database has records of bibliographic descriptions of theses. Currently it
supports Indian Languages like Kannada, Hindi and other Languages are under construction. It can be
searched in six ways viz. simple search, advanced search, field specific search, directory search, author
search and subject search. Under Library Science it includes 8 entries.
UGC India’s Initiative
The UGC-Infonet E-journal consortium is our pride in the field of education and research.
Under the consortium, about 4000 full text scholarly electronic journals from 25 publishers across the
globe can be accessed. The programme is wholly funded by the UGC and monitored by INFLIBNET
17

18. (Information and Library Network) Centre, Ahmedabad. It provides links to 16 Open Access services.
INFLIBNET maintains
Following databases which have an open access.
 Online Profile of Academic Community of Indian Universities
 Research Projects Database
 Experts Database in Science and Technology (EDST)
 Books Database
 Theses Database
 Serials Database
Digital Library of DRTC
The DRTC digital repository contains a specialist collection of Library and Information
Science resources. The objectives are to provide an open platform for information professionals to
enable the sharing of resources worldwide; to provide access to papers published in DRTC conference
and seminar proceedings and to facilitate digital library research interactions through a discussion
forum “Digital Library Research Group” (DLRG).
1.8.2 International level
Atlantic university
Therefore, we intend to make progress by:
18

19.  Encouraging our students, faculty, researchers, grant recipients to publish their work according
to the principles of the open access paradigm.
 Make course content, lectures, assignments and other course materials available to the public.
 Encouraging the holders of cultural heritage to support open access by providing their resources
on the Internet.
 Advocating that open access publication be recognized in promotion and tenure evaluation.
 Advocating the intrinsic merit of contributions to an open access infrastructure by software tool
development, content provision, metadata creation, or the publication of individual articles.
Sherpa University Nottingham
Since the paths to achieving the goal of open access to scientific information were defined in
2003, many initiatives have tried to contribute to its development and diffusion. These include,
for example, the two important tools Sherpa/Romeo2 and Sherpa/Juliet3 developed by the
Sherpa project of the University of Nottingham; the ROAR4 and the ROARMAP5 registries
developed by the University of Southampton.
1 This project is funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education and Science.
2 http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/
3 http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet/
4 http://roar.eprints.org/
19

20. 5 http://www.eprints.org/openaccess/policysignup/
Open Access at Concordia
In April 2010, Concordia’s Senate passed a Resolution on Open Access (pdf) encouraging
faculty and students to make their peer-reviewed research and creative output freely accessible by
depositing it in Spectrum, Concordia's institutional repository, or another open access venue. Concordia
is the first major university in Canada where faculty have given their overwhelming support to a
concerted effort to make the full results of their research universally available in this way.
In September 2011, Concordia's Senate unanimously recommended that the university
president sign the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities on
behalf of the university, extending the University's commitment to making knowledge produced by its
faculty and students universally accessible.
South Africa
South Africa EIFL (Electronic Information for Libraries) in 2004 through SASLI (South Africa
Site Licensing Initiative) brought OA issues into South Africa. By 2008, there were 14 IRs in South
Africa. Currently there are 24 OA IRs in most of the universities and research institutes. South Africa
leads in the number of OA IRs and other OA initiatives in Africa.
Ghana
20

21. (1) Kick –off OA sensitization Workshop by CARLIGH and EIFL in June 2007 to introduce
OA IR and its various software. A follow workshop on DSpace Software, installation and use for IR
was organized by CARLIGH and INASP in September 2008. Workshop on IR Policy, and workflows
held in March 2011 KNUST has its OA IR up and running since 2009. Some universities- UG and
UCC- about to launch their OA IRs. Other universities are far into their planning stages.
(2) Plans are completed to organize journals from universities and research institutes in the
country to publish OA. In all workshops organized, participants consisted of Librarians,
Faculty/Researchers and IT personnel who will be involved in the OA IR work and they work together.
1.8.3 Selected open access resources:
The following are the open access resources were selected for this study and the details are
DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals
The aim of the Directory of Open Access Journals (http://www.doaj.org/) is to increase the
visibility and ease of use of open access scientific and scholarly journals thereby promoting their
increased usage and impact. The Directory aims to be comprehensive and cover all open access
21

22. scientific and scholarly journals that use a quality control system to guarantee the content.
22

23. NPTEL-National Programme on Technology Enhanced Learning
The main objective of NPTEL program is to enhance the quality of engineering education in the
country by developing curriculum based video and web courses. This is being carried out by IITs
(Seven), IISc Bangalore and other premier institutions as a collaborative project.
23

24. NDLTD – Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
The Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD), an international organization
dedicated to promoting the adoption, creation, use, dissemination, and preservation of electronic theses
and dissertations (ETDs). We support electronic publishing and open access to scholarship in order to
enhance the sharing of knowledge worldwide. Our website includes resources for university
administrators, librarians, faculty, students, and the general public.
24

25. OAJSE –Open Access Journal Search Engine
It gives you the open access journals with the efficiency of free, full text, quality controlled journals.
http://oajse.com/
Open J-Gate
25

26. Open J-Gate is an electronic gateway to global journal literature in open access domain.
Launched in 2006, Open J-Gate is the contribution of Informatics (India) Ltd to promote OAI.
Open J-Gate provides seamless access to millions of journal articles available online. Open J-
Gate is also a database of journal literature, indexed from 8194 open access journals, with links
to full text at Publisher sites. The Open J-Gate site is updated every day.
SHODHGANGA
26

27. The Shodhganga@INFLIBNET Centre provides a platform for research students to deposit their Ph.D.
theses and make it available to the entire scholarly community in open access. The repository has the
ability to capture, index, and store, disseminate and preserve ETDs submitted by the researchers.
27

28. CHAPTER-II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The review of the literature is an essential component of any research investigation, which gives
necessary input to the investigator to frame the research study on the chosen topic. Review of related
studies further avoids the duplication work that has already been done in that area. It also helps the
researcher to study the different aspects of the problem. It enables the researcher to identify the
unexplored areas, in order to create new grounds for research. It sets an investigation in the right
direction, which would keep abreast of the latest developments of the subject. The review of related
literature has been collected from various forms such as books, journals articles, thesis, reports, and
websites and so on. The literature pertinent to the following areas has been reviewed and appended
below in reverse chronological order.
Nick, J. (2012) explained The Electronic publishing has changed the landscape for
broadcasting scholarly information. Now Open Access is globalizing scholarly work. Open Access
facilitates lifelong learning habits; enhances dissemination and distribution of information; impacts the
informatics curriculum; supports active learning; and provides areas for nursing informatics research.
28

29. In the last 10 years the Open Access Movement has formalized into a distinct publishing paradigm.
Many free, full-text resources are now available to guide nursing practice. This article describes the
Open Access structure, and provides suggestions for using Open Access resources in classroom and
practice settings. The nursing community is only beginning to accept and use Open Access. Yet all
nurses should be aware of the unique opportunity to obtain free, current, and scholarly information
through a variety of avenues and also to incorporate this information into their daily practice. The
resources presented in this article can be used to increase nursing knowledge and support evidence-
based practice.
Dichev, C., Dicheva, D. (2012) has explained Open content and open access to resources
are important factors in the innovation of Computer Science education. This paper presents a study
aimed at gaining an understanding of the needs of Computer Science educators in terms of Open
Educational Resources (OER): what kind of resources they need, when they need them, how they use
them, and what are the barriers and the enablers for using OER The results of the study are compared
and analyzed in the context of the popular OER sites. The work contributes to the research on OER
utilization and discovery.
Björk, B. -., Solomon, D. (2012) highlighted the article processing charge (APC) is
currently the primary method of funding professionally published open access (OA) peer-reviewed
journals. The pricing principles of 77 OA publishers publishing over 1,000 journals using APCs were
studied and classified. The most commonly used pricing method is a single fixed fee, which can either
be the same for all of a publisher's journals or individually determined for each journal. Fees are
usually only levied for publication of accepted papers, but there are some journals that also charge
submission fees. Instead of fixed prices, many publishers charge by the page or have multi-tiered fees
29

30. depending on the length of articles. The country of origin of the author can also influence the pricing,
in order to facilitate publishing for authors from developing countries
Xia, J. (2012) revealed the research uses the h-index to rank the quality of library and
information science journals between 2004 and 2008. Selected open access (OA) journals are included
in the ranking to assess current OA development in support of scholarly communication. It is found
that OA journals have gained momentum supporting high-quality research and publication, and some
OA journals have been ranked as high as the best traditional print journals. The findings will help
convince scholars to make more contributions to OA journal publications, and also encourage librarians
and information professionals to make continuous efforts for library publishing.
Ghosh, M. (2011) described the some of the current literature and discuss some ways to
advocate for open access (OA) programs adopted by libraries in various institutions. It points out that
the library and information science/system community's enthusiasm for innovations in OA may have
unintended negative financial consequences. This overview provides a list of relevant
literature/resources in the area of library advocacy, with regard to the ongoing needs of OA
repositories. There is a focus on OA in India. Design/methodology/approach: The literature review is
not comprehensive but selective and fairly recent; it includes published resources from the last ten
years and lists organizations advocating for a sustainable OA model. Findings: The advocacy roles for
librarians in promoting the OA movement, and the challenges they are facing in this era are discussed.
The author stresses that a proactive approach in information handling and collaboration with
information technology staff and academics are essential for OA to be sustainable. Originality/value:
Owing to poor or reduced government funding for libraries, librarians are forced to advocate for OA in
new and different ways. Library officers/information managers serving in universities and academic
30

31. institutions can launch a program to help faculty pay for publishing in OA journals, introducing the
concept and securing funding through various means.
Nagaraja, A., Joseph, S. A., Polen, H. H., Clauson, K. A. (2011) revealed as assess
and catalogue the magnitude of URL attrition in a high-impact, open access (OA) general medical
journal. Design/methodology/approach: All Public Library of Science Medicine (PLoS Medicine)
articles for 2005-2007 were evaluated and the following items were assessed: number of entries per
issue; type of article; number of references per entry; number of references that contained URLs; and
the access date listed for each URL citation. URLs were then evaluated for accessibility status (i.e.
active or defunct). Findings: In total, 1,133 articles were published from 2005-2007 in PLoS Medicine.
The 1,133 articles contained 28,177 references, with 2,503 (8.9 per cent) identified as URLs. Non-
research articles accounted for a substantially higher percentage of URL references (17.4 per cent)
compared to research articles (4.2 per cent). Almost 17 per cent of the URL references were defunct
and the rate of URL attrition increased as time elapsed. Research limitations/implications: Information
management policy makers need to re-examine the importance of preserving the internet materials long
term. Both publisher and author should expand efforts to preserve internet materials. Common
guidelines should be developed (e.g. by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors) and
implemented by all publishers to address URL use as references. Originality/value: This article will be
of interest to those in the field.
Russell, I. G. (2011) described the last decade, institutional repositories and open access have
generated considerable interest within the academic community. The aim of this article is to analyze
diverse concepts and functions assigned to institutional repositories over time, as well as their role in
the open access movement, especially with regard to enhancing the visibility of academic materials in
31

32. general. This paper consists of a critical overview of the literature on institutional repositories, with
particular emphasis on repository functionality, and arrives at three definitions of the strategic the
functions of repositories as assets for: in-house archiving; motors for re-conceptualizing scholarly
publications; and as broader digital infrastructure. These definitions are then employed to analyze the
current state of institutional repositories and suggest lines for further research.
Bosina, L. V., Shaburova, N. N. (2011) focused On open access resources are required
and the developmental patterns of open access models, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of
open access information flows; it introduces a navigator that has been created as a tool for the use of
open access resources. It also contains an analysis of statistical data about the use of this tool, including
the results of surveys and interviews with the experts from one of the top research institutes of the
Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and presents the authors' ideas about the role of
libraries in the open access movement.
Zeng, D. (2010) highlighted the implication of open access journals and related items and
probed into the route to the open access, think that the copyright problem, operating outlay, quality-
controlling problem. Finally, the paper pointed out that open access, as the potent opponent to the
traditional publishing model, will make great progresses under the attention paid by the peers both
domestic and abroad.
Martin, R. A. (2010) revealed as Academic libraries are eager to orient patrons to free
and open access materials in their databases, digital repositories, and Web sites. These materials
include journal literature, textbooks, and open educational resources. Discovery of open access content
has been improved by catalogs that index open metadata and link resolvers that point to quality Internet
32

33. resources. Librarians and staff save patrons time and money by helping them find open course
materials and scholarly works, and the library benefits from reduced subscription costs and by
promoting local intellectual capital. Nevertheless, finding these materials is still a challenge.
Roy, M. (2010) discussed as growing population, human settlements, industrialization and
intensification in groundwater-based cultivation have resulted in severe onslaught on underground
aquifers in West Bengal, an eastern province of India with high population density. The present paper
focuses on this water resource management issue. The study shows that traditional, village-level
surface water reservoirs which for centuries had supplemented irrigation in addition to providing water
for all sorts of domestic needs are now in doldrums. Through statistical analysis, the study shows that
for all practical purposes, there is very little effective management of these precious open-access water
resources. The situation calls for paradigm shift in policy on water resource management that entails
development of community-based management catalyzed by government intervention, external
agencies and NGOs under supervision and control of local elected bodies.
Huang, R., Xia, X. (2009) has Examined Open Access (OA) resources in the subject area
Language (linguistics) and Literature play an important role in research and study in this field. This
paper analyses the functions and characteristics of this kind of resources, explores different approaches
of OA resources in Language (linguistics) and literature. In the end, the paper comes to the conclusion
that the strategies it employs carry significance for other disciplines and users should take the
appropriate measures to get the OA resources they need.
Xiao, X., Zhang, X. (2009) described the attainability of Open Access(OA) resource needs
information policy's support, OA resource development policy include national policy, policy of
33

34. created institutions of OA journal and OA depository, policy of traditional publishers and research
funding agencies and information service agencies' policy. The OA resource development policy of
China should learn the establishment mechanism and policies abroad, take care of the phase
characteristic of OA resource, pay attention to advertisement and transparency of the policy.
Kato, K. (2009) described the purpose of this study is to investigate how open access natural
resources are used. Usually, natural resources like forest products and fishery products are placed under
the control of the state, a public corporation, community and some private actor. But some open access
natural resources, like wild grasses are not administered and anyone admitted to access to get these
natural resources. To avoid the over exploitation, the use of resources and the conservation of them
should be well-balanced. I chose Kozagawa-river in the south area of Kii-peninsula for this study, and
cite over thirty example of fishing methods dividing into personal and communal type. The case of
fishing in Kozagawa-river, resources of river belong to public and people used resources of river freely.
However, people merely fought for resources. Because, river was almost used to convey timbers, it is
not possible to be engaged in fisher. So, river fishes, shrimps and crabs are not recognized as resources
of money income. This circumstance is not a general example. However, this case excludes the
background of the use of open-access natural resources and contributes to the development of study of
subsistence.
Zhang, Q., Krichel, T., Malone, C., Pfeiffer, H. D., Shreeves, S. L. (2008) developed
an open access community is a digital repository or an online community where scientific information
and communication are free to the public through computing technologies (Hanauske, M., et al 2007;
Hubbard, C., et al, 2005). Open access community provides a new way for knowledge sharing and
knowledge management. It takes advantage of collective expertise by providing a repository for
34

35. research papers and research data that are scattered or take a long time to be published. The panel will
discuss experiences and challenges people face in various open access communities. Particularly, we
will discuss the following issues: • How did each community or repository achieve the functions of
"organize" and "share" among people having a common interest in the community? • How long did it
take to launch and establish an open-access community? • What impact of such an open-access
community / repository has on people's interaction with information? Impact on fee based digital
libraries or traditional libraries? • What the tradeoffs are between opened vs. controlled? • How well do
they address privacy issues? • How well are current open access community/ repository meeting human
needs and what should future technology research and development involve to better meet user needs?
Cho, S. -. (2008) has explained Open Access (OA) environment where article-based or
author-based evaluation is important, a new evaluation system is needed to accommodate
characteristics of Open Access Resources (OAR) and to overcome limitations of pre-existing
evaluation systems such as journal-based evaluation. Primary and secondary evaluation factors were
selected. Primary factors include hits and citations that constitutes composite index. Several secondary
factors each for article and author evaluation were selected for normalization of the indexes. To
validate superiority of newly developed normalized composite index systems compared to the
monovariable index system, time-driven bias and power of discrimination were adopted. The results
led to the conclusion that composite index proved to be a more stable index offsetting the negative
effects from one element to another and normalization makes the composite index even more stable by
controlling the bias from external elements.
Birdyshaw, E., Ellis, C. (2007) we develop a tractable dynamic model of the exploitation
of an environmental resource with endogenous property rights. We are able to explain both the
35

36. evolution of property rights and environmental quality. The model demonstrates that the development
of property rights may emerge from within a community as a response to the overexploitation of an
open-access resource. In the equilibrium of our model, the resource is fully privatized and resource
quality is greater than under the open-access steady state. We show that, while environmental quality
may initially decline, privatizing the resource reduces its exploitation and eventually environmental
quality improves.
Fragoulis, K. N., Korbila, I. P., Dimopoulos, G., Falagas, M. E. (2007) have explained
respiratory tract infections represent a common problem in everyday practice. The development of the
World Wide Web can assist clinicians and other medical care professionals in finding useful
information on various clinical conditions, including upper and lower respiratory tract infections. To
identify websites containing information for health care professionals on upper and lower respiratory
tract infections, we searched popular search engines such as Google and Yahoo. We also reviewed the
sites of major institutions as well as relevant organizations and professional societies and associations.
Only those sites that included material in the English language were open access and developed by a
governmental and/or academic institution, or a national or international professional society or
associations were included. We selected 106 sites that provide information on upper respiratory tract
infections and 67 sites that provide information on lower respiratory tract infections. We tried to
identify freely available Internet resources with relevant information on upper and lower respiratory
tract infections. We believe that the list of relevant World Wide Web resources we generated may be
useful as an educational tool for clinicians and trainees.
Morrison, H. G. (2006) described the open access movement seeks to make scholarly,
peer-reviewed journal articles freely available to anyone, anywhere over the World Wide Web. There
36

37. were some very significant developments in the area of Open Access in 2004, including statements by
major fund donors in support of Open Access. There are now so many Open Access scholarly journal
articles available, that using the resources and related tools is essential for libraries. Libraries can
provide more and faster resources for users by supplementing paid resources with Open Access
resources. Library resources, such as software that fixes links, commonly named resolvers, are
beginning to incorporate Open Access materials and Web searches for Open Access materials. After
exhausting traditional resources, interlibrary loan staff members are beginning to include Google
searching in their workflow. This article will discuss what Open Access is, the dramatic growth of
Open Access, major collections, resources and tools. The article will explore the implications, issues,
and leadership opportunities for resource sharing specialists.
Jinji, N. (2006) focused on I investigate the effects of trade liberalization and policies on
deforestation by extending a small open economy model with open-access renewable resources
developed by Brander and Taylor (1997a). I indigenize the carrying capacity of the resource. I find,
unlike Brander and Taylor, that trade liberalization may increase the forest stock in the resource-
abundant country and may decrease the forest stock in the resource-scarce country. Moreover, the
policies primarily aimed at protecting forests, such as import restrictions by importing countries and
forest certification for well-managed forests, may have perverse effects on the forest stock.
37

38. REFERENCES
1. Nick, J. (2012). Open access part II: The structure, resources, and Implications for nurses.
Online Journal of Issues in Nursing, 17(1).
2. Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2012). Open educational resources in computer science teaching.
Paper presented at the SIGCSE'12 - Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on
Computer Science Education, 619-624.
3. Björk, B. -. & Solomon, D. (2012). Pricing principles used by scholarly open access
publishers. Learned Publishing, 25(2), 132-137.
4. Xia, J. (2012). Positioning open access journals in a LIS journal ranking. College and Research
Libraries, 73(2), 134-145.
5. Ghosh, M.(2011). Advocacy for open access: A selected review of the literature and resource
list. Library Hi Tech News, 28(2), 19-23.
6. Nagaraja, A., Joseph, S. A., Polen, H. H., & Clauson, K. A. (2011). Disappearing act:
Persistence and attrition of uniform resource locators (URLs) in an open access medical
journal. Program, 45(1), 98-106.
38

39. 7. Russell, I. G. (2011). Visibility of academic resources: A critical review of the role of
institutional repositories and open access. 25(53), 159-181.
8. Bosina, L. V., & Shaburova, N. N. (2011). Open access foreign scientific resources and the
SciGuide navigator. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 38(4), 251-257.
9. Zeng, D. (2010). Study on the models of open access resources. Paper presented at the 2nd
International Conference on Information Science and Engineering, ICISE2010 - Proceedings,
2403-2407.
10. Roy, M. (2010). Managing the village-level open-access water resources in a region facing
rapidly declining water availability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-14.
11. Martin, R. A. (2010). Finding free and open access resources: A value-added service for
patrons. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery and Electronic Reserve, 20(3), 189-
200.
12. Huang, R., & Xia, X. (2009). Open access resources in language (linguistics) and literature.
Paper presented at the ITME2009 - Proceedings 2009 IEEE International Symposium on IT in
Medicine and Education, 997-1002.
13. Xiao, X., & Zhang, X. (2009). The research of open access resource development policy in
china. Paper presented at the Proceedings - 2009 International Conference on New Trends in
Information and Service Science, NISS 2009, 470-473.
14. Kato, K. (2009). Study on use of open access natural resources. Sokendai Review of Cultural
and Social Studies, (5) .
39

40. 15. Zhang, Q., Krichel, T., Malone, C., Pfeiffer, H. D., & Shreeves, S. L. (2008).
Knowledge sharing and management in open access e-resources & communities. Proceedings of
the ASIST Annual Meeting, 45 .
16. Cho, S. -. (2008). New evaluation indexes for articles and authors' academic achievements
based on open access resources. Scientometrics, 77(1), 91-112.
17. Birdyshaw, E., & Ellis, C. (2007). Privatizing an open-access resource and environmental
degradation. Ecological Economics, 61(2-3), 469-477.
18. Fragoulis, K. N., Korbila, I. P., Dimopoulos, G., & Falagas, M. E. (2007). Open access
World Wide Web resources on upper and lower respiratory tract infections. International Journal
of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 11(11), 1237-1245.
19. Morrison, H. G. (2006). The dramatic growth of open access: Implications and opportunities
for resource sharing. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery and Electronic
Reserve, 16(3), 95-107.
20. Jinji, N. (2006). International trade and terrestrial open-access renewable resources in a small
open economy. Canadian Journal of Economics, 39(3), 790-808.
40

41. CHAPTER-III
RESEARCH DESIGN
3.1 OBJECTIVES
The following are the objectives of this study:
 To identify the level of awareness about Open Access Resources among Research Scholars of
Bharathidasan University.
 To examine the tools used to get awareness on Open Access Resources by Research Scholars.
 To analyse the usage of Open Access Resources by Research Scholars.
 To study about the barriers of Open Access Resources by Research Scholars.
3.2 METHODOLOGY
The study is focused to identify the awareness of Open Access Resources (OAR) among
Research Scholars of Bharathidasan University. In order to fulfill the objectives of the study, a well
structured questionnaire was designed and administrated directly to the Research Scholars by using
simple random sampling technique. It was divided into four sections such as, Awareness of Open
41

42. Access Resources, Usage of Open Access Resources, and Tools for Open Access Resources and
Barriers of accessing Open Access Resources. The respondents were categorized into two major groups
based on the research programmes as M.Phil and Ph.D. A total of 450 questionnaires randomly
administrated and 274 responses received (60.8%). The data collected were converted into SPSS for
analysis.
3.4 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The main focus of this studies in general and is to know the usage of open access resources by
the Research scholar of Bharathidasan University. The study geographical area is restricted to
departments in main campus of Bharathidasan University, Trichy.
3.5 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
The Bharathidasan University library got a very good collection in open access resources and collection
development on continues basis. Now it is required to check the usage of the open access resources.
Hence this project ‘AWARENESS AND USAGE OF OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES AMONG RESEARCH SCHOLARS
OF BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY: A STUDY’ has been initiated.
42

43. CHAPTER-IV
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 Bharathidasan University Departments Research Programmes:
Bharathidasan University offering the reserearch programmes for M.Phil and PhD
programmes from various departments i.e. Animal Science, Biochemistry, Bioinformatics,
Biomedical Science ,Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering, Chemistry, Commerce and
Financial Studies, Computer Science and Engineering, Economics, Educational Technology,
Education, Engineering and Technology, School of English and other Foreign Languages,
Environmental Biotechnology, Environmental Management, Geography, Geology, History,
Industrial Biotechnology, Library & Information Science, Lifelong Learning, Marine
Biotechnology, Marine Science, Mathematics, Microbiology, Performing Arts, Physical
Education , Physics, Plant Science, remote sensing , Social Work, Sociology, Statistics, Tamil
Studies, Women's Studies. The students are benefited well from the good collection of books and
current journals in addition to the electronic resources.
43

44. 4.2. DATA ANALYSIS
4.2 Data Analysis
The usage of Open Access Resources is varied among Research Scholars due to level of awareness,
usage and infrastructure facilities. In order to study the analysis, the data were collected from the
following respondents as Ph.D and M.Phil and the same is given in table 1.
Table-1
S.No Description
No. of
Questionnaire
Received
%
1.
Research
scholars
Ph.D 113 41.2%
2. M.Phil 161 58.8%
Total
274
100%
In order to fulfill the objectives, there were 450 copies of the questionnaires distributed and 274 respondents
have replied making 100%.It is found that majority of the respondents are Ph.D 113 (41.2%) .It is further found
that the Research Scholars in M.Phil 161(58.8%).
44

45. 4.3. AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY RESEARCH SCHOLARS
The publication of open access resources in the form of journals, course materials, books,
databases are considerably increased during recent years with many features such as accessibility,
search facility and downloading of the content in various formats. The following open access resources
were identified and ascertained on three point scales such as “Low”, “Medium”, “High” and the same
is given in table 2.
Table 2
AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES
S.No Description
General
Low Medium High
M Std.
Deviatio
n
R
1. DOAJ(Directory
of Open Access
Journals )
61
22.3%
83
30.3%
130
47.4% 2.25 .797 1
2. NPTEL(National
programme on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
52
19.0%
106
38.7%
116
42.3%
2.23 .748 2
3. NDLTD(Networ
ked Digital
Libraries of
Thesis and
Dissertation)
49
17.9%
141
51.5%
84
30.7% 2.12 .686 4
4. OAJSE-Open
Access journal
Search Engine 117
42.7%
102
37.2%
55
20.1%
1.77 .760 6
5. Open J-Gate 54
19.7%
116
42.3%
104
38.0% 2.18 .738 3
6. Shodhganga
110
40.1%
90
32.8%
74
27.0%
1.86 .810 5
45

46. It is found from table 2 that the majority of Research Scholars were highly aware of
DOAJ (Mean2.25,) and occupied first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean 2.23) placed in the second rank
respectively. It is further found that Open J-Gate has occupied third rank with (Mean2.18) among
Research Scholars. A good number of Research Scholars were aware NDLTD (Mean2.12), followed
by Shodhganga (Mean1.86) and ranked in fourth and fifth positions respectively. As per the awareness
is concerned on OAJSE (Mean 1.77), found to be very few in other resources.
4.4. AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY PROGRAMMES
The awareness level of open access resources were ascertained among Ph.D and M.Phil and same
is given in Table 3.
Table 3
AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY PROGRAMMES
S.No Description
Ph.D
n=113
M.Phil
n=161
Low Medium High
M
Std.
Deviation
R Low Medium High M
Std.
Deviation
R
1.
DOAJ(Directory
of Open Access
Journals )
23
20.4%
32
28.3%
58
51.3% 2.30 .791
1
38
23.6%
51
31.7%
72
44.7% 2.21 .801
1
2.
NPTEL(National
programme on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
18
15.9%
42
37.2%
53
46.9% 2.30 .732
1
34
21.1%
64
39.8%
63
39.1% 2.18 .757
3
3.
NDLTD(Network
ed Digital
Libraries of
Thesis and
Dissertation)
22
19.5%
59
52.2%
32
28.3% 2.08 .688
4
27
16.8%
82
50.9%
52
32.3% 2.15 .685
4
4.
OAJSE-Open
Access journal
Search Engine
49
43.4%
49
43.4%
15
13.3% 1.69 .692
6
68
42.2%
53
32.9%
40
24.8% 1.82 .802
6
5.
Open J-Gate
18
15.9%
58
51.3%
37
32.7% 2.16 .680
3
36
22.4%
58
36.0%
67
41.6% 2.19 .778
2
6.
Shodhganga
45
39.8%
37
32.7%
31
27.4% 1.87 .814
5
65
40.4%
53
32.9%
43
26.7% 1.86 .810
5
46

47. It is found from the table 3 that majority of the Ph.D were highly aware of DOAJ (Mean 2.30)
and NPTEL (Mean2.30), occupied first rank, followed by Open J-Gate (Mean 2.16) ranked third
NDLTD (Mean 2.08) placed in the fourth rank, whereas the M.Phil were highly aware of same DOAJ
(Mean 2.21) occupied first rank, followed by Open J-Gate (Mean 2.19) placed in the second rank,
NPTEL (Mean 2.18) occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Ph.D and M.Phil
were aware of “Shodhganga” (Mean1.87), (Mean1.86) .It is further found that very few Ph.D and
M.Phil were aware of OAJSE (Mean1.69), (Mean1.82) and occupied last ranking of the Open Access
Resources.
4.5. AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY GENDER
The table 4 shows the level of awareness possessed by Research Scholars by gender
]
47

48. S.No Description
Male
n=177
Female
n=97
Low Medium High
M Std.
Deviation
R Low Medium High M Std.
Deviatio
n
R
1. DOAJ(Director
y of Open
Access
Journals )
21
11.9%
70
39.5%
86
48.6% 2.36 .687
2
40
41.2%
13
13.4%
44
45.4% 2.04 .934 2
2. NPTEL(Nation
al programme
on Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
11
6.2%
83
46.9%
83
46.9% 2.40 .606 1
41
42.3%
23
23.7%
33
34.0% 1.91 .874 5
3. NDLTD(Netw
orked Digital
Libraries of
Thesis and
Dissertation)
32
18.1%
46
26.0%
46
26.0% 2.07 .660 4
17
17.5%
42
43.3%
38
39.2% 2.21 .724 1
4. OAJSE-Open
Access
journal Search
Engine
69
39.0%
37
20.9%
37
20.9% 1.81 .754
5
48
49.5%
31
32.0%
18
18.6% 1.69 .768
6
5. Open J-Gate 21
11.9%
75
42.4%
75
42.4% 2.30 .672 3
33
34.0%
35
36.1%
29
29.9% 1.95 .802 4
6. Shodhganga
71
40.1%
35
19.8%
35
19.8% 1.79 .748 6
39
40.2%
19
19.6%
39
40.2% 2.00 .901 3
It is found from table 4 that the majority of Gender belongs to Male were highly aware of
NPTEL (49.9%) occupied first rank, followed by DOAJ (48.6%) ranked second, Open J-Gate (42.4%)
placed in the third rank, whereas the Female were highly aware of NDLTD (39.2%) occupied first
rank, followed by DOAJ (45.4%) placed in the second rank, “Shodhganga” (40.2%) occupied third
rank. It is further found that a good number of Male were aware of NDLTD (26.0%), ranked fourth
place and fifth Place is OAJSE (20.9%), whereas Female were aware of Open J-Gate (29.9%) occupied
fourth rank and NPTEL (34.0%) ranked fifth. It is concluded from the study that the Gender belongs to
48

49. these Male and Female were not well aware of certain resources like, OAJSE and “Shodhganga” , since
the level of awareness is also found low than other resources.
4.6. AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY SUBJECT
The use of e- resources is based on certain key features like availability, accessibility, search
facility and the users’ literacy. The table 5 shows the level of awareness possessed by Research
Scholars belongs to two major subject groups.
49

50. S.No Descripti
on
Science
n=176
Humanities
n=98
Low
Mediu
m
High M Std.
Deviation
R Low Medium High M Std.
Deviation
R
1. DOAJ(Directo
ry of Open
Access
Journals )
27
20.8%
44
33.8%
59
45.4% 2.24 .778 1
34
23.6%
39
27.1%
71
49.3% 2.25 .817 1
2. NPTEL(Natio
nal programme
on Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
24
18.5%
51
39.2%
55
42.3%
2.23 .745 2
28
19.4%
55
38.2%
61
42.4%
2.22 .754 2
3. NDLTD(Net
worked
Digital
Libraries of
Thesis and
Dissertation)
22
16.9%
69
53.1%
39
30.0% 2.13 .675
4
27
18.8%
72
50.0%
45
31.3% 2.12 .698
4
4. OAJSE-Open
Access
journal
Search
Engine
50
38.5%
50
38.5%
30
23.1%
1.84 .772 6
67
46.5%
52
36.1%
25
17.4%
1.70 .746 6
5. Open J-Gate 28
21.5%
54
41.5%
48
36.9% 2.15 .751 3
26
18.1%
62
43.1%
56
38.9% 2.20 .727 3
6. Shodhganga
49
37.7%
48
36.9%
33
25.4%
1.87 .787 5 61
42.4%
42
29.2%
41
28.5%
1.86 .832 5
It is found from table 5 that the majority of Subject belongs to Science and Humanities were
highly aware of DOAJ (Mean 2.24), (Mean2.25) occupied first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean 2.23),
(Mean2.22) ranked second Open J-Gate (Mean 2.15), (Mean 2.20) placed in the third rank. It is further
found that a good number of Science and Humanities NDLTD (2.13), (Mean 2.12), ranked fourth place
and fifth Place is “Shodhganga” (Mean1.87), (Mean1.86). It is further found that very few Science and
Humanities were not well aware of certain resources like OAJSE since the level of awareness is also
found low than other resources.
50

51. 4.7. AWARENESS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY NATIVITY
The awareness level of open access resources was ascertained by Rural and Urban and same is given in
Table 6.
S.N
O
Descriptio
n
Rural
n=167
Urban
n=107
Low Medium High
M Std.
Deviatio
n
R Low Medium High M
Std.
Deviatio
n
R
1. DOAJ(Directory
of Open Access
Journals )
42
25.1%
54
32.3%
71
42.5% 2.17 .806
2
19
17.8%
29
27.1%
59
55.1% 2.37 .771
1
2. NPTEL(National
programme on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
36
21.6%
60
35.9%
71
42.5%
2.20 .774 1
16
15.0%
46
43.0%
45
42.1%
2.27 .708 2
3. NDLTD(Netwo
rked Digital
Libraries of
Thesis and
Dissertation)
36
21.6%
86
51.5%
45
26.9% 2.05 .696 4
13
12.1%
55
51.4%
39
36.4% 2.24 .656 3
4. OAJSE-Open
Access journal
Search Engine
76
45.5%
62
37.1%
29
17.4%
1.71 .743
6
41
38.3%
40
37.4%
26
24.3%
1.85 .782
6
5. Open J-Gate
34
20.4%
74
44.3%
59
35.3% 2.14 .733
3
20
18.7%
42
39.3%
45
42.1% 2.23 .747
4
6. Shodhganga
64
38.3%
62
37.1%
41
24.6%
1.86 .783 5 46
43.0% 26.2%
33
30.8%
1.87 .854 5
It is found from table 6 that the majority of Nativity belongs to Rural were highly aware of
NPTEL (Mean 2.20) occupied first rank, followed by DOAJ (Mean 2.17) ranked second Open J-Gate
(Mean 2.14) placed in the third rank, whereas the Urban were highly aware of DOAJ (Mean2.37)
occupied first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean2.27) placed in the second rank, NDLTD (Mean2.24)
occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Rural were aware of NDLTD (Mean
2.05), ranked fourth place and fifth Place is “Shodhganga” (Mean 1.86), whereas Urban were aware of
Open J-Gate (Mean 2.23 ) occupied fourth rank and “Shodhganga” (Mean 1.87) ranked fifth. It is
51

52. further found that very few of Rural and Urban were not well aware of certain resources like OAJSE
since the level of awareness is also found low than other resources.
4.8. USAGE ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY PROGRAMME
The Usage level of open access resources were ascertained among Ph.D and M.Phil and same is given
in Table 7.
S.No
Ph.D
n=113
M.Phil
n=161
Descri
ption
Poor average
Satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Poor avera
ge
satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R
1. DOAJ(D
irectory
of Open
Access
Journals
)
27
23.9%
35
31.0%
1
.9%
40
35.4%
10
8.8% 2.74 1.387
1
46
28.6
%
49
30.4%
16
9.9%
39
24.2%
11
6.8% 2.50 1.313
2
2. NPTEL(
National
program
me on
Technolog
y
Enhanced
Learning)
24
21.2%
30
26.5%
39
34.5%
7
6.2%
13
11.5%
2.60 1.221 2
33
20.5
%
43
26.7%
45
28.0%
25
15.5%
15
9.3%
2.66 1.229 4
3. NDLTD(
Network
ed
Digital
Librarie
s of
Thesis
and
Dissertat
ion)
15
13.3%
67
59.3%
23
20.4%
5
4.4%
3
2.7% 2.23 .837
5
14
8.7%
95
59.0%
35
21.7%
11
6.8%
6
3.7% 2.37 .879
6
4. OAJSE-
Open
Access
journal
Search
Engine
35
31.0%
43
38.1%
11
9.7%
14
12.4%
10
8.8%
2.30 1.273
4 67
41.6
%
46
28.6%
7
4.3%
34
21.1%
7
4.3%
2.18 1.293 3
5. Open J-
Gate
29
25.7%
34
30.1%
22
19.5%
19
16.8%
9
8.0% 2.51 1.261
3
53
32.9
%
31
19.3%
22
13.7%
38
23.6%
17
10.6% 2.59 1.420 1
6. Shodhga
nga 56
49.6%
23
20.4%
31
27.4%
3
2.7%
0
.0%
1.83 .924
6
92
57.1
%
32
19.9%
19
11.8%
14
8.7%
4
2.5%
1.79 1.107
5
52

53. It is found from the table 7 that majority of the Ph.D were highly used DOAJ (Mean 2.74),
occupied first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean2.60), ranked second, Open J-Gate (Mean 2.51) placed
in the third rank, whereas the M.Phil were highly used Open J-Gate (Mean 2.59) occupied first rank,
followed by DOAJ (Mean 2.50) placed in the second rank, OAJSE (Mean 2.18) occupied third rank. It
is further found that a good number of Ph.D were used OAJSE (Mean2.30), ranked fourth place, and
fifth palace is NDLTD (Mean2.23), whereas M.Phil were used NPTEL (Mean2.66) occupied fourth
rank and “Shodhganga”(Mean 1.79) ranked fifth rank. It is concluded from the study that the
Programme belongs to these Ph.D and M.Phil were not well used to certain resources like,
“Shodhganga” and NDLTD , since the level of usage is also found low than other resources.
4.9. USAGE ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY GENDER
The table 8 shows the level of Usage possessed by Research Scholars belongs to gender.
53

54. S.N
o
Male
n=177
Female
n=97
Descri
ption
Poor average
Satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Poor avera
ge
satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mea
n
Std.
Deviati
on
R
1. DOAJ(Di
rectory of
Open
Access
Journals )
21
11.9%
70
39.5%
17
9.6%
57
32.2%
12
6.8% 2.82 1.200 2
52
53.6
%
14
14.4%
0
.0%
22
22.7%
9
9.3% 2.19 1.504 3
2. NPTEL(N
ational
programm
e on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
10
5.6%
54
30.5%
62
35.0%
32
18.1%
19
10.7%
2.97 1.071 1
47
48.5
%
19
19.6%
22
22.7%
0
.0%
9
9.3%
2.02 1.249 4
3. NDLTD(
Networke
d Digital
Libraries
of Thesis
and
Dissertati
on)
10
5.6%
115
65.0%
36
20.3%
16
9.0%
0
.0% 2.32 .7190
5
19
19.6
%
47
48.5%
22
22.7%
0
.0%
9
9.3% 2.30 1.083
2
4. OAJSE-
Open
Access
journal
Search
Engine
27
15.3%
85
48.0%
18
10.2%
39
22.0%
8
4.5%
2.52 1.128 4
75
77.3
%
4
4.1%
0
.0%
9
9.3%
9
9.3%
1.69 1.379 5
5. Open J-
Gate
30
16.9%
65
36.7%
30
16.9%
48
27.1%
4
2.3% 2.61 1.123
3
52
53.6
%
0
.0%
14
14.4%
9
9.3%
22
22.7% 2.47 1.702
1
6. Shodhgan
ga
101
57.1%
18
10.2%
37
20.9%
17
9.6%
4
2.3%
1.89 1.168
6
47
48.5
%
37
38.1%
13
13.4%
0
.0%
0
.0%
1.64 .7077
6
It is found from table 8 that the majority of Gender belongs to Male were highly used NPTEL
(Mean 2.97) occupied first rank, followed by DOAJ (Mean 2.82) ranked second Open J-Gate (Mean
2.61) placed in the third rank, whereas the Female were highly used Open J-Gate (Mean 2.47)
occupied first rank, followed by NDLTD (Mean2.30) placed in the second rank, DOAJ (Mean 2.19)
occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Male were used OAJSE (Mean 2.52),
ranked fourth place and fifth Place is NDLTD (2.32),whereas Female were used NPTEL(Mean 2.02)
54

55. occupied fourth rank and OAJSE (1.69)ranked fifth rank. It is further found that “Shodhganga” were
used very less by both genders.
4.10. USAGE ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY SUBJECT
The table 9 shows the level of Usage possessed by Research Scholars belongs to Subject.
S.N
o
Science
n=176
Humanities
n=98
Descri
ption
Poor average
satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Poor avera
ge
satisfac
tion
Good Very
Good
Mea
n
Std.
Deviati
on
R
1. DOAJ(Di
rectory of
Open
Access
Journals )
30
23.1
%
42
32.3%
11
8.5%
35
26.9
%
12
9.2% 2.66 1.337 1
43
29.9
%
42
29.2
%
6
4.2%
44
30.6%
9
6.3% 2.54 1.358 3
2. NPTEL(N
ational
programm
e on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
30
23.1
%
35
26.9%
39
30.0%
13
10.0
%
13
10.0
%
2.56 1.232 2
27
18.8
%
38
26.4
%
45
31.3%
19
13.2%
15
10.4% 2.70 1.218 1
3. NDLTD(
Networke
d Digital
Libraries
of Thesis
and
Dissertati
on)
18
13.8
%
73
56.2%
23
17.7%
12
9.2%
4
3.1% 2.31 .932
4
11
7.6
%
89
61.8
%
35
24.3%
4
2.8%
5
3.5%
2.32 .8006
4
4. OAJSE-
Open
Access
journal
Search
Engine
49
37.7
%
44
33.8%
8
6.2%
20
15.4
%
9
6.9%
2.20 1.284 5
53
36.8
%
45
31.3
%
10
6.9%
28
19.4%
8
5.6% 2.25 1.288 5
5. Open J-
Gate
39
30.0
%
31
23.8%
26
20.0%
22
16.9
%
12
9.2% 2.51 1.324
3
43
29.9
%
34
23.6
%
18
12.5%
35
24.3%
14
9.7%
2.60 1.385
2
6. Shodhgan
ga
77
59.2
%
24
18.5%
18
13.8%
8
6.2%
3
2.3%
1.73 1.060
6
71
49.3
%
31
21.5
%
32
22.2%
9
6.3%
1
.7% 1.87 1.009
6
55

56. It is found from table 9 that the majority of Subject belongs to Science were highly used DOAJ
(Mean 2.66) occupied first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean 2.56) ranked second Open J-Gate (Mean
2.51) placed in the third rank, whereas the Humanities were highly used NPTEL (Mean2.70) occupied
first rank, followed by Open J-Gate (Mean2.60) placed in the second rank, DOAJ (Mean 2.54)
occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Science and Humanities were used
NDLTD (2.31), (Mean 2.32), ranked fourth place and fifth Place is OAJSE (Mean2.20), (Mean2.25). It
is further found that “Shodhganga” were used very less by both subjects.
4.11. USAGE ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY NATIVITY
The Usage levels of open access resources were ascertained among Rural and Urban and same is given
in Table 10.
56

57. S.N
o
Rural
n=167
Urban
n=107
Descri
ption Poor
avera
ge
satisf
action
Goo
d
Very
Goo
d
Mea
n
Std.
Devia
tion
R Poo
r
aver
age
satisf
action
Good Very
Good
Me
an
Std.
Devia
tion
R
1. DOAJ(Di
rectory of
Open
Access
Journals )
47
28.1
%
51
30.5%
10
6.0%
47
28.1
%
47
28.1
%
2.55 1.347 2
26
24.3
%
33
30.8
%
7
6.5%
32
29.9%
9
8.4% 2.67 1.351 3
2. NPTEL(N
ational
programm
e on
Technology
Enhanced
Learning)
37
22.2
%
45
26.9%
51
30.5%
16
9.6%
18
10.8
%
2.59 1.237 1
20
18.7
%
28
26.2
%
33
30.8%
16
15.0%
10
9.3%
2.70 1.207 2
3. NDLTD(
Networke
d Digital
Libraries
of Thesis
and
Dissertati
on)
19
11.4
%
100
59.9%
33
19.8%
11
6.6%
4
2.4% 2.28 .8438
4
10
9.3
%
62
57.9
%
25
23.4%
5
4.7%
5
4.7% 2.37 .8957
4
4. OAJSE-
Open
Access
journal
Search
Engine
63
37.7
%b
59
35.3%
10
6.0%
25
15.0
%
10
6.0%
2.16 1.248 5
39
36.4
%
30
28.0
%
8
7.5%
23
21.5%
7
6.5%
2.33 1.338 5
5. Open J-
Gate
53
31.7
%
42
25.1%
31
18.6%
29
17.4
%
12
7.2% 2.43 1.291
3
29
27.1
%
30
28.0
%
13
12.1%
28
26.2%
14
13.1% 2.76 1.431
1
6. Shodhgan
ga 88
52.7
%
35
21.0%
32
19.2%
10
6.0%
2
1.2%
1.82 1.019
6 60
56.1
%
20
18.7
%
18
16.8%
7
6.5%
2
1.9%
1.79 1.061 6
It is found from table 10 that the majority of Nativity belongs to Rural were highly used NPTEL
(Mean 2.59) occupied first rank, followed by DOAJ (Mean 2.55) ranked second Open J-Gate (Mean
2.43) placed in the third rank, whereas the Urban were highly used Open J-Gate (Mean2.76) occupied
first rank, followed by NPTEL (Mean2.70) placed in the second rank, DOAJ (Mean2.67) occupied
third rank. It is further found that a good number of Rural and Urban were used NDLTD (Mean 2.28),
(Mean 2.37), ranked fourth place and fifth place is OAJSE (Mean 2.16), (Mean 2.33). It is further
found that “Shodhganga” were used very less by both nativities.
57

58. 4.12. OPEN ACCESS LITERACY TOOLS BY PROGRAMMES
The study is also attempted to identify the tools used by the Ph.D and M.Phil to access information
available in the Open Access Resources and the same is given in table 11.
S.No Description
Ph.D
n=113
M.Phil
n=161
Yes No Mean Std.
Deviation
R Yes No Mean Std.
Deviation
R
1. Email 85
75.2%
28
24.8% 1.24 .433 5
112
69.6%
49
30.4% 1.30 .461 3
2. E-Discussion 50
44.2%
63
55.8%
1.55 .498 1
82
50.9%
79
49.1%
1.49 .501 1
3. Library
Professional
86
76.1%
27
23.9% 1.23 .428 6
114
70.8%
47
29.2% 1.29 .456 4
4. Journals /
Resource
Websites 75
66.4%
38
33.6%
1.33 .474 3
117
72.7%
44
27.3%
1.27 .447 6
5. Conference/S
eminar/Work
shop
82
72.6%
31
27.4% 1.27 .448 4
114
70.8%
47
29.2% 1.29 .456 4
6. Library
Website 69
61.1%
44
38.9%
1.38 .489 2
102
63.4%
59
36.6%
1.36 .483 2
It is found from table 11 that majority of Ph.D and M.Phil (55.8%), (49.1%), were preferred
to use E-Discussion to collect information on Open Access Resources and placed in the first rank ,
followed by Library Website (38.9%), (36.6%) and occupied second rank. It is further found that a
good number of Ph.D were preferred to attend Journal/Resource (33.6%), also to use the websites of
the Conference/Seminars and Workshops (27.4%) to get information about Open Access Resources,
occupied third rank and fourth rank respectively, whereas, the M.Phil were preferred to collect
information from the E-Mail (30.4%) as well as to use the website of Conference/Seminars and
Workshops (29.2%) and Library Professionals (29.2%) both occupied third and fourth rank
58

59. respectively. The Ph.D were given least important for the E-Mail (24.8%), and Library Professional
(23.9%),whereas the M.Phil were also given least importance for Journal/Resource (27.3%) and both
occupied fifth and sixth rank respectively.
4.13. OPEN ACCESS LITERACY TOOLS BY GENDER
The study is also attempted to identify the tools used by the Male and Female to access
information available in the Open Access Resources and the same is given in table 12.
S.No Description
Male
n=177
Female
n=97
Yes No Mean Std.
Deviation
R Yes No Mea
n
Std.
Deviation
R
1. Email 119
67.2%
58
32.8% 1.32 .470 3
78
80.4%
19
19.6% 1.19 .398 6
2. E-Discussion 86
48.6%
91
51.4%
1.51 .501 1
46
47.4%
51
52.6%
1.52 .501 1
3. Library
Professional
131
74.0%
46
26.0% 1.25 .439 6
69
71.1%
28
28.9% 1.28 .455 3
4. Journals /
Resource
Websites 119
67.2%
58
32.8%
1.32 .470 3
73
75.3%
24
24.7%
1.24 .433 4
5. Conference/Semin
ar/Workshop
123
69.5%
54
30.5% 1.30 .461 5
73
75.3%
24
24.7% 1.24 .433
4
6. Library Website
111
62.7%
66
37.3%
1.37 .484 2
60
61.9%
37
38.1%
1.38 .488 2
It is found from table 12 that majority of Male and Female (51.4%), (52.6%) were preferred to use
E-Discussion to collect information on Open Access Resources and placed in the first rank , followed
by Library Website (37.3%), (38.1%), and occupied second rank. It is further found that a good number
of Male were preferred to attend Journal/Resource (32.8%), also to use the websites of the E-Mail
59

60. (32.8%) to get information about Open Access Resources, occupied only third rank respectively,
whereas, the Female were preferred to collect information from the Library Professionals (28.9%) as
well as to use the website of Conference/Seminars and Workshops (24.7%) and Journals /Resources
(Mean 1.24) both occupied third and fourth rank respectively. The Male were given least important for
the Conference/Seminar/Workshop (30.5%), and Library Professional (26.0%), whereas the Female
were also given least importance for E-Mail (19.6%) and both occupied fifth and sixth rank
respectively.
4.14. OPEN ACCESS LITERACY TOOLS BY SUBJECT
The usage of tools for making awareness of open access resources is based on the interest, skills of the
users as well as the facilities available in the libraries. The study is aimed to find out the various tools
used by the Research Scholars belong to two groups of subject and the same is given in table 13.
S.No Descripti
on
Science
n=176
Humanities
n=98
60

61. Yes No Mean Std. Deviation R Yes No Mea
n
Std.
Deviation
R
1. Email 99
76.2%
31
23.8% 1.23 .427 6
98
68.1%
46
31.9% 1.31 .467 3
2. E-
Discussion
64
49.2%
66
50.8%
1.50 .501 1
68
47.2%
76
52.8%
1.52 .500 1
3. Library
Professional
94
72.3%
36
27.7% 1.27 .449 5
106
73.6%
38
26.4% 1.26 .442 6
4. Journals /
Resource
Websites 91
70.0%
39
30.0%
1.30 .460 3
101
70.1%
43
29.9%
1.29 .459
4
5. Conference/
Seminar/Wor
kshop
93
71.5%
37
28.5% 1.28 .452 4
103
71.5%
41
28.5% 1.28 .452 5
6. Library
Website 76
58.5%
54
41.5%
1.41 .494 2
95
66.0%
49
34.0%
1.34 .475 2
It is found from table 13 that majority of Science and Humanities (50.8%) , (52.8%), were preferred
to use E-Discussion to collect information on Open Access Resources and placed in the first rank ,
followed by Library Website (41.5%), (34.0%) and occupied second rank . It is further found that a
good number of Science were preferred to attend Journal/Resource (30.0%), also to use the websites of
the Conference/Seminar/Workshop (28.5%) to get information about Open Access Resources, occupied
third and fourth rank respectively, whereas, the Humanities were preferred to collect information from
the E-Mail (31.9%) as well as to use the website of Journals/ Resources (29.9%) both occupied third
and fourth rank respectively. The Science were given least important for the Library Professional
(27.7%), and E-Mail (23.8% ),whereas the Humanities were also given least importance for
Conference/Seminar/Workshop (28.5%) and Library Professional(26.4%) both occupied fifth and sixth
rank respectively.
4.15. OPEN ACCESS LITERACY TOOLS BY NATIVITY
61

62. The tools used to open access resources were ascertained among Rural and Urban and same is given in
Table 14.
S.No Descripti
on
Rural
n=167
Urban
n=107
Yes No Mean Std.
Deviation
R Yes No Mean Std.
Deviation
R
1. Email 123
73.7%
44
26.3% 1.26 .441 6
74
69.2%
33
30.8% 1.30 .464 3
2. E-Discussion 79
47.3%
88
52.7%
1.59 .500 1
53
49.5%
54
50.5%
1.50 .502 1
3. Library
Professional
121
72.5%
46
27.5% 1.27 .448 5
79
73.8%
28
26.2% 1.26 .441 4
4. Journals /
Resource
Websites 112
67.1%
55
32.9%
1.32 .471 3
80
74.8%
27
25.2%
1.25 .436
6
5. Conference/S
eminar/Work
shop
116
69.5%
51
30.5% 1.30 .461 4
80
74.8%
27
25.2% 1.25 .436
6
6. Library
Website 105
62.9%
62
37.1%
1.37 .484 2
66
61.7%
41
38.3%
1.38 .488 2
It is found from table 14 that majority of Rural and Urban (52.7%) ,(50.5%), were preferred to use
E-Discussion to collect information on Open Access Resources and placed in the first rank , followed
by Library Website (37.1%), (38.3%) and occupied second rank . It is further found that a good
number of Rural were preferred to attend Journal/Resource (32.9%), also to use the websites of the
Conference/Seminar/Workshop (30.5%) to get information about Open Access Resources, occupied
third and fourth rank respectively, whereas, the Urban were preferred to collect information from the E-
Mail (30.8%) as well as to use the website of Library Professional (26.2%) both occupied third and
fourth rank respectively. The Rural were given least important for the Library Professional (27.5%),
and E-Mail (26.3%), whereas the Urban were also given least importance for
62

63. Conference/Seminar/Workshop (25.2%) and Journal Resources (25.2%) both occupied fifth and sixth
rank respectively.
4.16. BARRIERS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY PROGRAMMES
The Barriers level of open access resources were ascertained among Ph.D and M.Phil and same is
given in Table 15.
S.NO
Ph.D
n=113
M.Phil
n=161
Descriptio
n
Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagree
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagre
e No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mea
n
Std.
Deviati
on
R
1. Difficult to
locate the URL
of the
journals/Resou
rces
22
19.5%
11
9.7%
31
27.4%
35
31.0%
14
12.4% 3.07 1.300 8
20
12.4%
21
13.0%
52
32.3%
39
24.2%
29
18.0% 3.22 1.244 8
63

64. 2. The resources
are not
constantly
available at
same URLs
address
10
8.8%
21
18.6%
30
26.5%
34
30.1%
18
15.9% 3.25 1.193
5
9
5.6%
30
18.6%
55
34.2%
45
28.0%
22
13.7% 3.25 1.085
7
3. The
information
may not be
available later
7
6.2%
9
8.0%
49
43.4%
47
41.6%
1
.9% 3.23 .855 6
12
7.5%
19
11.8%
48
29.8%
66
41.0%
16
9.9% 3.34 1.055 6
4. The Open
access journals
are not always
authoritative 3
2.7%
9
8.0%
44
38.9%
41
36.3%
16
14.2% 3.51 .926 2 6
3.7%
18
11.2%
52
32.3%
64
39.8%
21
13.0% 3.47 .981 4
5. Lack of
uniqueness
15
13.3%
19
16.8%
26
23.0%
40
35.4%
13
11.5% 3.15 1.226 7
20
12.4%
12
7.5%
42
26.1%
53
32.9%
34
21.1% 3.42 1.253 5
6. Server down is
a major
problem in
open access
Resources
23
20.4%
3
2.7%
15
13.3%
47
41.6%
25
22.1% 3.42 1.406 4
23
14.3%
6
3.7%
29
18.0%
55
34.2%
48
29.8% 3.61 1.332 3
7. Lack of
uniform
standard in
Open access
journal
publishing
industries
10
8.8%
0
.0%
38
33.6%
51
45.1%
14
12.4% 3.52 1.018 1
9
5.6%
0
.0%
59
36.6%
67
41.6%
26
16.1% 3.62 .947 2
8. Lack of
awareness of
open access
Resources
14
12.4%
15
13.3%
16
14.2%
42
37.2%
26
23.0% 3.45 1.316 3
4
2.5%
20
12.4%
26
16.1%
71
44.1%
40
24.8% 3.76 1.039 1
It is found from the table 15 that majority of the Ph.D were highlighted barriers as “Lack of
uniform standard in Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean 3.52), occupied first rank,
followed by “The Open access journals are not always authoritative” (Mean 3.51) ranked second,
“Lack of awareness of open access Resources” (Mean 3.45) placed in the third rank, whereas the
M.Phil were faced problems the same “Lack of awareness of open access Resources” (Mean 3.76)
occupied first rank, followed by “Lack of uniform standard in Open access journal publishing
industries” (Mean 3.62) placed in the second rank, “Server down is a major problem in open access
Resources” (Mean 3.61) occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Ph.D were noted
problems of “the resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean 3.25), ranked
fourth place and“The information may not be available later” (Mean3.23) ranked in fifth place, whereas
M.Phil were faced problems of “Lack of uniqueness” (Mean 3.42) occupied fourth rank and “The
64

65. information may not be available later” (Mean 3.34) ranked fifth rank. The problems on “Lack of
uniqueness” (Mean 3.15), and “Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources”(Mean 3.07)
among Ph.D and “The resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean3.25), and
“Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources” (3.22) among M.Phil both were ranked also
found in the low level in the overall ranking of the Open Access Resources.
4.17. BARRIERS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY GENDER
The table 16 shows the level of Barriers by Research Scholars belongs to gender
S.N
o
Male
n=177
Female
n=97
Description
Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagree
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mean
Std.
Devia
tion
R Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagre
e
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mea
n
Std.
Devia
tion
R
65

66. 1)
1
Difficult to locate
the URL of the
journals/Resourc
es
18
10.2
%
9
5.1%
46
26.0%
61
34.5
%
43
24.3% 3.57
1.20
4 2
24
24.7
%
23
23.7
%
37
38.1
%
13
13.4%
0
.0% 2.40
1.00
6 8
2)
2
The resources
are not
constantly
available at same
URLs address
19
10.7
%
28
15.8%
41
23.2%
49
27.7
%
40
22.6%
3.35
1.28
4 8
0
.0%
23
23.7
%
44
45.4
%
30
30.9%
0
.0%
3.07 .739
6
3)
3
The information
may not be
available later 0
.0%
24
13.6%
75
42.4%
61
34.5
%
17
9.6% 3.40 .841 7
19
19.6
%
4
4.1%
22
22.7
%
52
53.6%
0
.0% 3.10
1.16
8
5
4)
4
The Open access
journals are not
always
authoritative 0
.0%
18
10.2%
55
31.1%
67
37.9
%
37
20.9%
3.69 .915 1
9
9.3%
9
9.3%
41
42.3
%
38
39.2%
0
.0%
3.11 .922 4
5
5)
Lack of
uniqueness 10
5.6%
22
12.4%
33
18.6%
80
45.2
%
32
18.1% 3.57
1.09
5 2
25
25.8
%
9
9.3%
35
36.1
%
13
13.4%
15
15.5% 2.83
1.36
6 7
6)
6
Server down is a
major problem
in open access
Resources
31
17.5
%
0
.0%
34
19.2%
67
37.9
%
45
25.4%
3.53
1.34
8 5
15
15.5
%
9
9.3%
10
10.3
%
35
36.1%
28
28.9%
3.53
1.39
9 3
7)
7
Lack of uniform
standard in
Open access
journal
publishing
industries
10
5.6%
0
.0%
59
33.3%
96
54.2
%
12
6.8% 3.56 .851 4
9
9.3%
0
.0%
38
39.2
%
22
22.7%
28
28.9% 3.61
1.17
6 2
8)
8
Lack of
awareness of
open access
Resources
18
10.2
%
26
14.7%
27
15.3%
68
38.4
%
38
21.5%
3.46
1.26
1 6
0
.0%
9
9.3%
15
15.5
%
45
46.4%
28
28.9%
3.94 .905 1
It is found from the table 16 that majority of the Male were noted problems of “The Open access
journals are not always authoritative” (Mean 3.69), occupied first rank, followed by The “Lack of
uniqueness” (Mean 3.57) and”Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources”(Mean 3.57) same
ranked in second, “Lack of uniform standard in Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean
3.56) placed in the third rank, whereas the Female were highly faced problems of “Lack of awareness
of open access Resources” (Mean 3.94) occupied first rank, followed by “Lack of uniform standard in
Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean 3.61) placed in the second rank, “Server down is a
major problem in open access Resources” (Mean 3.53) occupied third rank. It is further found that a
66

67. good number of Male were highlighted barriers as “Server down is a major problem in open access
Resources” (Mean 3.53), ranked fourth place and “Lack of awareness of open access Resources”
(Mean3.46) ranked in fifth place, whereas Female were noted problems of “The information may not
be available later” (Mean 3.10) occupied fourth rank and “The resources are not constantly available at
same URLs address” (Mean 3.07) ranked fifth rank. “The information may not be available later”
(Mean 3.40), and“the resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean 3.35) among
Male and “Lack of uniqueness” (Mean2.83), and “Difficult to locate the URL of the
journals/Resources” (2.40) among Female both were ranked also found in the low level in the overall
ranking of the Open Access Resources.
4.18. BARRIERS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY SUBJECT
The table 17 shows the level of Barriers possessed by Research Scholars belongs to two groups of
Subject.
S.No
Science
n=176
Humanities
n=98
descripti
on
Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagree
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Strongly
Disagre
e
Disagre
e No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mea
n
Std.
Deviati
on
R
67

68. 1 Difficult to
locate the URL
of the
journals/Resou
rces
19
14.6
%
19
14.6%
37
28.5%
31
23.8
%
24
18.5
%
3.16 1.300 8
23
16.0
%
13
9.0%
46
31.9
%
43
29.9%
19
13.2% 3.15 1.242 8
2 The resources
are not
constantly
available at
same URLs
address
9
6.9%
32
24.6%
37
28.5%
30
23.1
%
22
16.9
%
3.18 1.186
7
10
6.9%
19
13.2
%
48
33.3
%
49
34.0%
18
12.5%
3.31 1.075
6
3 The
information
may not be
available later
11
8.5%
13
10.0%
47
36.2%
48
36.9
%
11
8.5% 3.26 1.040 6
8
5.6%
15
10.4
%
50
34.7
%
65
45.1%
6
4.2% 3.31 .921 6
4 The Open
access journals
are not always
authoritative 4
3.1%
15
11.5%
47
36.2%
46
35.4
%
18
13.8
%
3.45 .973 4
5
3.5%
12
8.3%
49
34.0
%
59
41.0%
19
13.2%
3.52 .945 4
5 Lack of
uniqueness
19
14.6
%
11
8.5%
35
26.9%
42
32.3
%
23
17.7
%
3.30 1.273
5
16
11.1
%
20
13.9
%
33
22.9
%
51
35.4%
24
16.7% 3.32 1.228
5
6 Server down is
a major
problem in
open access
Resources
22
16.9
%
4
3.1%
20
15.4%
50
38.5
%
34
26.2
%
3.53 1.364 3
24
16.7
%
5
3.5%
24
16.7
%
52
36.1%
39
27.1%
3.53 1.368 3
7 Lack of
uniform
standard in
Open access
journal
publishing
industries
10
7.7%
0
.0%
44
33.8%
55
42.3
%
21
16.2
%
3.59 1.016 1
9
6.3%
0
.0%
53
36.8
%
63
43.8%
19
13.2% 3.57 .942 2
8 Lack of
awareness of
open access
Resources
11
8.5%
18
13.8%
18
13.8%
53
40.8
%
30
23.1
%
3.56 1.226 2
7
4.9%
17
11.8
%
24
16.7
%
60
41.7%
36
25.0%
3.70 1.116 1
It is found from the table 17 that majority of the science were faced problems of “Lack of
uniform standard in Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean 3.59), occupied first rank,
followed by “Lack of awareness of open access Resources” (Mean 3.56) ranked second, “Server down
is a major problem in open access Resources” (Mean 3.53) placed in the third rank, whereas the
Humanities faced the problem of “Lack of awareness of open access Resources” (Mean 3.70) occupied
first rank, followed by “Lack of uniform standard in Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean
3.57) placed in the second rank, “Server down is a major problem in open access Resources” (Mean
68

69. 3.53) occupied third rank. It is further found that a good number of Science were noted problem of
“Lack of uniqueness” (Mean 3.30), ranked fourth place and “The information may not be available
later” (Mean3.26) ranked in fifth place, whereas Humanities were faced the problems of “Lack of
uniqueness” (Mean 3.32) occupied fourth rank and “The information may not be available later” (Mean
3.31) and “The resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean 3.31) ranked fifth
rank. The Barriers on “The resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean 3.18),
and “Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources” (Mean 3.16) among Science and The
resources are not constantly available at “Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources” (3.15)
among Humanities both were ranked also found in the low level in the overall ranking of the Open
Access Resources.
4.19. BARRIERS ON OPEN ACCESS RESOURCES BY NATIVITY
The study is also attempted to identify the barriers by Rural and Urban scholars while accessing Open
Access Resources and the same is given in table 18.
S.No
Rural
n=167
Urban
n=107
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mean
Std.
Deviati
on
R Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
agree
Mea
n
Std.
Deviati
on
R
a.
1
Difficult to
locate the URL
of the
journals/Resour
ces
27
16.2
%
21
12.6%
42
25.1%
46
27.5
%
31
18.6
%
3.19 1.327 8
15
14.0
%
11
10.3
%
41
38.3
%
28
26.2%
12
11.2% 3.10 1.173 8
69

70. 2
The resources
are not
constantly
available at
same URLs
address
14
8.4%
31
18.6%
42
25.1%
52
31.1
%
28
16.8
%
3.29 1.193
6
5
4.7%
20
18.7
%
43
40.2
%
27
25.2%
12
11.2%
3.19 1.022
7
3
The information
may not be
available later 12
7.2%
18
10.8%
57
34.1%
70
41.9
%
10
6.0% 3.28 .988 7
7
6.5%
10
9.3%
40
37.4
%
43
40.2%
7
6.5% 3.30 .965 4
4
The Open
access journals
are not always
authoritative 4
2.4%
12
7.2%
54
32.3%
71
42.5
%
26
15.6
%
3.61 .916 3
5
4.7%
15
14.0
%
42
39.3
%
34
31.8%
11
10.3%
3.28 .990 5
5
Lack of
uniqueness
24
14.4
%
18
10.8%
35
21.0%
58
34.7
%
32
19.2
%
3.33 1.301
5
11
10.3
%
13
12.1
%
33
30.8
%
35
32.7%
15
14.0% 3.28 1.163
5
6
Server down is a
major problem
in open access
Resources
28
16.8
%
4
2.4%
26
15.6%
60
35.9
%
49
29.3
%
3.58 1.376 4
18
16.8
%
5
4.7%
18
16.8
%
42
39.3%
24
22.4%
3.45 1.347 3
g.
7
Lack of uniform
standard in
Open access
journal
publishing
industries
11
6.6%
0
.0%
53
31.7%
76
45.5
%
27
16.2
%
3.64 .976 2
8
7.5%
0
.0%
44
41.1
%
42
39.3%
13
12.1% 3.48 .974 2
h.
8
Lack of
awareness of
open access
Resources
13
7.8%
19
11.4%
23
13.8%
65
38.9
%
47
28.1
%
3.68 1.217 1
5
4.7%
16
15.0
%
19
17.8
%
19
17.8%
19
17.8%
3.56 1.091 1
It is found from the table 18 that majority of the Rural and Urban scholars were found the barrier
as “Lack of awareness of open access Resources” (Mean 3.68), (Mean 3.56) occupied first rank,
followed by “Lack of uniform standard in Open access journal publishing industries” (Mean 3.64)
(Mean 3.48) ranked second. Further it found that Rural scholars were facing “The Open access journals
are not always authoritative” (Mean 3.61) placed in the third rank, whereas Urban scholars were facing
“Server down is a major problem in open access Resources” (Mean 3.45) occupied third rank.
It is also found that a good number of Rural were noted problems of “Lack of uniqueness”
(Mean 3.33), ranked fourth place and “The resources are not constantly available at same URLs
address” (Mean3.29) ranked in fifth place, whereas Urban were noted problems of “The Open access
journals are not always authoritative” (Mean 3.28) and the same “Lack of uniqueness” (Mean 3.28)
occupied fourth rank and “The resources are not constantly available at same URLs address” (Mean
70

71. 3.19) ranked fifth rank. The Barriers on “The information may not be available later” (Mean 3.28), and
“Difficult to locate the URL of the journals/Resources” (Mean 3.19) among Rural and “Difficult to
locate the URL of the journals/Resources” (3.10) among Urban both were ranked and also found in the
low level in overall ranking of the Open Access Resources.
CHAPTER-V
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
71

72. 5.1 FINDINGS
The following are the major findings of this study
1. IT is found that majority of Research Scholars were highly aware of DOAJ and NPTEL.
2. Bharathidasan University department Ph.D scholars were highly aware of DOAJ and NPTEL
whereas M.Phil were highly aware of DOAJ and Open J-gate.
3. Scholars belong to Science and Humanities were not well aware of OAJSE open access
resources.
4. Scholars belongs to Science were highly used DOAJ and NPTEL whereas scholars belongs to
Humanities were highly used NPTEL and Open J-Gate.
5. Scholars from Urban and Rural were not much used of “Shodhganga” open access Electronic
theses and Dissertations.
6. Ph.D and M.Phil scholars were preferred E-Discussion and Library Website to collect
information on Open Access Resources.
7. Science and Humanities scholars were faced the barrier as “Lack of uniform standard in Open
accessjournal publishing industries and Lack of awareness on open access Resources.
72

73. 5.2 CONCLUSION
Open Access Resources are published in a variety of forms like Articles, conference papers, books,
research reports in all disciplines. The authors are also motivated to publish their research articles in the
open access journals to increase the usage of their articles.Morover, the publishers also interested to
publish the journals in the open access domain. The study has analyzed the awareness, usage, tool, and
barriers of Research Scholars towards Open Access Resources. The following are recommended based
on the present study
 The publication of Open Access Resource is tremendous increased in all fields of knowledge,
but the usage is not increased equally due to lack of awareness, infrastructure facilities. It is the
responsibilities of the LIS department, LIS professionals to create awareness about Open Access
Resources among the user community.
 The publishers should exhibit their products and service by means of conducting seminars,
conferences, and workshops in collaboration with educational institutions.
 The libraries should provide link to the Open Access Resources in library websites itself. It will
enable the users to make use of the resources for research and development activities in the
institutions.
73

74. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Birdyshaw, E., & Ellis, C. (2007). Privatizing an open-access resource and environmental
degradation. Ecological Economics, 61(2-3), 469-477.
Björk, B. -. & Solomon, D. (2012). Pricing principles used by scholarly open access
publishers. Learned Publishing, 25(2), 132-137.
Bosina, L. V., & Shaburova, N. N. (2011). Open access foreign scientific resources and the
SciGuide navigator. Scientific and Technical Information Processing, 38(4), 251-257.
Cho, S. -. (2008). New evaluation indexes for articles and authors' academic achievements based on
open access resources. Scientometrics, 77(1), 91-112.
Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2012). Open educational resources in computer science teaching. Paper
presented at the SIGCSE'12 - Proceedings of the 43rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer
Science Education, 619-624.
Fragoulis, K. N., Korbila, I. P., Dimopoulos, G., & Falagas, M. E. (2007). Open access World
Wide Web resources on upper and lower respiratory tract infections. International Journal of
Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 11(11), 1237-1245.
Ghosh, M.(2011). Advocacy for open access: A selected review of the literature and resource
list. Library Hi Tech News, 28(2), 19-23.
Huang, R., & Xia, X. (2009). Open access resources in language (linguistics) and literature. Paper
presented at the ITME2009 - Proceedings 2009 IEEE International Symposium on IT in Medicine and
Education, 997-1002.
74

75. Jinji, N. (2006). International trade and terrestrial open-access renewable resources in a small open
economy. Canadian Journal of Economics, 39(3), 790-808.
Kato, K. (2009). Study on use of open access natural resources. Sokendai Review of Cultural and
Social Studies, (5).
Martin, R. A. (2010). Finding free and open access resources: A value-added service for patrons.
Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery and Electronic Reserve, 20(3), 189-200.
Morrison, H. G. (2006). The dramatic growth of open access: Implications and opportunities for
resource sharing. Journal of Interlibrary Loan, Document Delivery and Electronic Reserve, 16(3), 95-
107.
Nagaraja, A., Joseph, S. A., Polen, H. H., & Clauson, K. A. (2011). Disappearing act:
Persistence and attrition of uniform resource locators (URLs) in an open access medical
journal. Program, 45(1), 98-106.
Nick, J. (2012). Open access part II: The structure, resources, and Implications for nurses. Online
Journal of Issues in Nursing, 17(1).
Roy, M. (2010). Managing the village-level open-access water resources in a region facing rapidly
declining water availability. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1-14.
Russell, I. G. (2011). Visibility of academic resources: A critical review of the role of institutional
repositories and open access. 25(53), 159-181.
Xia, J. (2012). Positioning open access journals in a LIS journal ranking. College and Research
Libraries, 73(2), 134-145.
75

76. Xiao, X., & Zhang, X. (2009). The research of open access resource development policy in china.
Paper presented at the Proceedings - 2009 International Conference on New Trends in Information and
Service Science, NISS 2009, 470-473.
Zeng, D. (2010). Study on the models of open access resources. Paper presented at the 2nd
International Conference on Information Science and Engineering, ICISE2010 - Proceedings, 2403-
2407.
Zhang, Q., Krichel, T., Malone, C., Pfeiffer, H. D., & Shreeves, S. L. (2008). Knowledge
sharing and management in open access e-resources & communities. Proceedings of the ASIST Annual
Meeting, 45.
76

77. Questionnaire
Awareness and Usage of Open Access
Resources among Research Scholars of Bharathidasan University
I. Personal Information
a. Name (Optional) :
b. Subject : Arts / Science
c. Programme : M.Phil / Ph.D
d. Gender : Male / Female
e. Qualification MA / MSc
f. Nativity : Rural / Urban
g. Name of the Institution
:
h. E-mail :
II.Aware of Open Access Resource
a. Please give the level of Open Access Resources (OAR)
S.No Description Low Medium High
1. DOAJ
2 NPTEL
3 NDLTD
4.
OAJSE-Open Access journal
Search Engine
5. Open J-Gate
6. Shodhganga
77

78. III.Usage of Open Access Resources
S.No Description Yes No
1. DOAJ
2 NPTEL
3. NDLTD
4
OAJSE-Open Access journal
Search Engine
5. Open J-Gate
6. Shodhganga
a.What is your frequency of using Open Access Resources?
S.No Description Low Medium High
1. Daily
2 Weekly
3 Fortnightly
4. Monthly
b.What type of Information you are searching in the Open Access Domain
S.No Description Yes No
1. Research Articles
2 Reviews
3. Research Reports
4 E-Books
5. Bibliographic Information
6. Conference paper
IV.How did you know about the Open Access Resources?
S.No Description Yes No
1. Email
2 E-Discussion
3. Library Professional
4 Journals Websites
5. Conference/Seminar/Workshop
6. Library Websites
V.Opinion on Open Access Journals
S.No Description SD DA NO A SA
1. It is to access the journals
2. Search options are given
3. Different file formats are available(PDF, HTML)
4. It is easy to search an article
78