Dear LIS Professionals,
Dr. Ananda Doddamani has made an accusation of plagiarism about the paper presented by Dr. Dharanikumar and Dr. B.S.Biradar in the recently concluded 58th ILA International Conference held from 24th to 27th February 2013 in Karnatak University, Dharwad. Dr. Dharanikumar in a rejoinder has written to many senior LIS professionals for their opinion and I have already replied to it as one of the Sr. professionals. In addition I have also made an appeal to all young professionals on the quality of papers and the presentations and on the host of unremitting conferences organised by LIS profession. The text of my observation and experiences of attending these conferences is reproduced below for the knowledge and information of all professionals to ponder over and interospect.
Truly yours,
Prof. A.Y.Asundi
Former Professor and Chairman,
Department of Library and Information Science,
and Officer in Charge, IT Centre,
Bangalore University, Bangalore - 560 056.
Cell: 9980815468, 23287786
ashokasundi@rediffmail.com, ashok_asundi@yahoo.com
Dear LIS Professionals, especially our younger generation :
I (we) have received a mail from Dr. Dharanikumar, a rejoinder to Dr. Anand Doddamani’s accusation that the former has involved in the act of Plagiarism, referring to the paper presented by Dr. Dharanikumar at the recently concluded 58th ILA International Conference held at Karnatak University, Dharwad, between 24th to 27th February 2013. Incidentally the paper by Dr. Dharanikumar and Dr. B.S.Biradar : “Mobile Alerting Service for Commerce PG Students of Kuvempu University: A Case Study” won the Best Paper Award. I have my own reservations on giving this award to this paper. However I honour the Judge’s decision in this regard. The paper title seems to be generalist only, does specify the context in which the alerting service to the clientele it is directed.
A paper by Dr. Anand Doddamani and Dr. Keshav entitled “Cell phones as Powerful Information Delivery Tools in Academic Libraries: An Experiment in Government First Grade College Library, Gudageri”. Here the author at least states it is in the context of Academic Libraries.
SMS Mania
Both the papers state they are using Way2SMS an SMS service provider. In fact Way2SMS service can be used for any service, how come it is specific to Libraries only? There are also some merits and demerits of these services, and the authors would have highlighted them for the benefit of the Researchers in this area. And there is a set procedure to use these services also which the authors have not detailed.
In the Academic Institutions the use of SMS services to alert the students has become very common, regarding, fees, classes, exams and other academic programs of their respective institutions for which the Institution management charges some fees to the student (somewhere around Rs. 1000 to 1500 per student per annum), and that SMS service providers charge fees separately for such bulk SMS services. I am making some specific remarks on your papers and for the guidance of others. In fact the SMS service has been highly commercialized, as one can see their widespread use in TV advertising, in Reality shows ( to vote a best artist) and even in Film Awards. Each one of us experience to receive JUNK SMS on our mobiles which have no relevance or need to our requirements. For instance I am old man, I receive at least 10 SMSs per day on “Beauty care, skin care” and it has become a nuisance for me to delete them.
Let me first deal with the contents of the two papers and the lacunae therein.
1. In real sense of using Mobile technology in library services is by using the Mobile for creating a website using the latest web technologies (Android Applications for example). This website will serve as a User Interface for the “to and from” communication between Users and the Library. In this context I give the following Reference of a book which uses the Web-based Mobile technology for Library Services. I was in University of Florida, USA in 2011 where I had an opportunity to go through this book available in the University Library. So I reiterate that using SMS service provider is not specific to library it can be for any service.
:
Ref: The Anywhere library: Primer for the mobile web. By Courtney Greene, Missy Roser, Elizabeth Ruane and ACRL, Chicago, 2010.
Given below is the XHTML Encoding for designing a Website on Mobile:
XHTML Mobile 1.1
<?xml version=’1.0’encoding=’UTF-8’?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC’-WAPFORUM/DTD XHTML Mobile 1.1//EN’
‘http://www.openmobilealliance.org/tech/DTD/xhtml-mobile11.dtd’>
<html xmlns=http://www/w3.org/1999/xhtml>
<head>
<title>Site Name</title>
</head>
<body>
My Page Title</H1>
<p>All of my exciting content. Also, contact us!</p>
<p><a href=”tel:22961311”>call us at 22961311</a></p>
<p><a href=”sms:9980815468”>Send SMS to 9980815468</a></p>
</p>
</body>
</html>
XHMTL Basic 1.1
<?xml version=”1.0”encoding=”utf-8”?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC”-//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.1//EN”
‘http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic11.dtd”>
<html xmlns=”http://www/w3.org/1999/xhtml” xml:lang=”en”>
<head>
<title>Site Name</title>
</head>
The highlighted portion is on library telephone number and mobile number of the user to whom the SMS goes and this has to be authenticated by a written consent from the User of the Library.
2. Secondly, the style of writing Research paper is not correct. One should not use ‘Personal nouns” like “I” “We” in the descriptions of the content. I request you to kindly go through some books on “Writing Research Papers”. I am surprised that the co-authors of both the papers ( Research guides themselves) have failed to notice this, and I suggest that before approving any paper under their joint authorship, the guides must look into these norms and should thoroughly discuss with their Research students as they reflect on their ability to guide students for research. They should stress more on QUALITY but less on QUANTITY.
3. References given at the end of both the papers are not at all relevant to the content and subject of the papers. They seem to be quite casual and ritualistic. Even there is a reference to some idea borrowed by the paper by Dr Doddamani but no reference is given to that statement.
4. Regarding the statistical data presented by both the papers. Dr. Dharanikumar has made some tables. Dr. Doddamani’s paper sans Tables. How one is sure that the authors have administered some sort of questionnaire to collect data. In recent years it is found by me while reviewing some papers for some International Journal that the authors have somehow compiled some hypothetical data without administering the Questionnaire. I wish that the authors of both papers would make available a specimen questionnaire (duly filled in) and that should be the practice in future while presenting the papers.
5. The use of SMS Service provider requires some Registration procedure. None of the papers have made any attempt describe the method of using the SMS Service provider like “Way2SMS” and also should have given some samples SMSs sent by them and response. The Service provider has a practice of sending an enquiry about some lapses in sending the SMS, and the quantum of number of SMSs at time and should have given some sample numbers and the names of the users for verification. How come that so many students have allowed the authors to know their Mobile/Cell numbers, which many consider it is purely private. The Web on mobile will not be constraint as it is users’ wish to seek the information directly from the Library staff.
So under the circumstances, it is a matter of relevance of the subject, to get a best paper award, where it is has not used best practice for the serving users. According to me both the papers fall outside the relevance of using Mobile for Library Services. I wish that the researchers especially the younger generation should make thorough study of the applications and find their relevance to Library situations. Recently I met some young professionals and made some suggestions in this context.
Let me present my observations on papers submitted and presented in the LIS “Conferences and Seminars” during the last 3-5 years.
1. There is a galore of Conferences and Seminars on LIS – National, International(?????) and so on. In the year 2011 about 350 such LIS conferences and seminars were organized – on the average one conference a day. There is no modes operandi to name the conference “National or International”. The criterion for the name International refers to the mode of technical sessions. Every session of presentation of contributed papers is preceded by a Plenary which is led by an international expert on one of the facets of the Theme of the conference, and it is a usual practice in most International conferences and I have been participant to at least 8-10 of them.
2. The Themes selected for the conferences are highly repetitive and the sub-themes cover everything under the sun. In the year 2012 back to back there were three conferences on “Information Literacy” within a short span. At least half a dozen on “E-resources and Digital Libraries, Open Access”. I have even opportunity to read papers where the libraries have no such cases for instance “Digital Library Consortia” and write papers.
3. Coming to the plagiarism, it is jokingly mentioned once to me the paper is generated out of “Ctl A + Ctl C + Ctl V”. Hope one can understand this computational process. During the last 3-5 years I had an opportunity to be on the Editorial Board of Conference papers and might have gone through about 1000 papers and some I had an opportunity read for my teaching and special lectures. In one case a paper has appeared in three conferences and the author has not presented his/her paper.
4. Once I saw a senior professional has been joint author for at least half a dozen papers in a single conference, either he/she or his/her research students has not come to present the papers (despite being present on the venue). The senior professional has to his/her credit at least 20 papers and has not presented even one. This way he/she add to their CV 20 papers as presented (but not presented) in conferences. Sometimes authors are so busy that they are the part and parcel of the organizing the conference. In an international conference
5. I have by accident came to know that a paper is 100% copied from an LIS Encyclopedia article on “Knowledge Management” and in one paper the entire data on Institutional Repositories is taken from Web from another study including the analysis part. I have come across three papers submitted in three different conferences by two authors, one of them is a Professor of LIS, only the Title is changed and the some additions to Introduction (irrelevant) and the data is identical in all the three papers. If I go on quoting it will be a D.Litt thesis such instances. I have considering the quality of these papers tend to decline to be on the Editorial board of these conference proceedings. Recently in one of the International Conferences (?) I have seen a paper on KO which is patchy taken from a PPT presentation available in Slideshare and some portion is from Wikipedia. The author has not cared to organize it and the same
is accepted. If anyone wants to see the evidences I am ready to share them conditionally.
6. Some of the subjects which are of very high tech in nature, some papers on Social Networking, Security, RFID Technology are so technical that they have no relevance to LIS, a paper on Social Networking/Book Marks, Social Media etc. are presented more than once by two authors and have just profiled the SN Sites as given on the web (Copy and Paste). Has anyone worked on the cost benefit analysis of using RFID Technology is the Library. Recently I had a discussion with a Librarian of a reputed Institution, his contention is that, the Institution Management is prepared to spend the amount, so we are not worried. I retorted, is not your duty to discuss on the cost analysis of adopting such technology in your library. He could not answer. The paper on Web and Data Security is highly technical and most of the diagrams are copied from the web. What is the point in writing and acceptance of such papers which are totally
irrelevant.
7. I understand that the Vice Chancellors are asking every teacher to organize one conference each in a year. I did not understand the logic and the logistics of organizing the conferences. Instead each teacher should be given a small amount say about Rs. 5000 per annum to collect data from the rural base and also to utilize to publish papers (in a reputed peer reviewed journal).
8. It is found that UGC is insisting on conference volumes should bear ISBN. Is ISBN a quality tag? What is the logic ? ISBN is a tag devised by Book/Publishing Industry for physical inventory (even RFID).
9. In the Refresher/Annual Seminars held at DRTC, each paper should end with a proposition(s) and they were discussed at length. I have had opportunities to attend number of such conferences held in the past. In the Seminar on “Reference Service in Action”, a suggestion was made to design a proforma for recording the reference queries and the discussion on the design of such a proforma lasted for nearly 30 minutes and it was finally approved after a prolonged discussion. I still have the specimen of that proforma the copy of which was sought by a Teacher from Punjabi University. How many teachers teaching Information Sources (reference sources) refer to the Grogan’s Case studies, I think they might have been derived from such an exercise.
10. There are no propositions generated out of the papers presented at the conferences now. No discussion are forthcoming from the present papers. The resolutions and recommendations drafted after the Conclusion of the conference deliberations are drawn much without reference to the papers presented at these conferences.
11. The attendance in the conferences is very poor, even though the number of Registered delegates runs to the extent of 200-300 even more. Most the delegates after Registration go on excursions and never return afterwards. Some times organizers make announcements on issue of certificates only to those who have presented papers, but in most cases it does not work. It is better that Organisers write to the Institutions on such lapses by the Delegates.
12. In a National Conference Celebrating the 100 years of LIS Education, for the Valedictory, which was attended by the Great grandson of Sayyaji Rao Gaekwad, we had hardly 20 registered delegates. We had to seek the presence of LIS Students to make the audience. Each of the technical sessions for presentation of papers list out 10-15 papers when the Chairman of the session takes stock of authors presence, it is less than 5 and once it was such dismal situation that a request was made to a senior professional to make a presentation from his treasure of experience to fill up the gap to kill the time up to the break ( tea or lunch).
13. The conferences will have a gala opening ( with all grandeur) honouring, appreciations, it takes sometimes half a day, and the technical sessions are put on hold and then will follow as ritual. Much importance is entrusted to grand opening ceremonies.
14. The information industry is highly diversifying and it found that the “Product Presentation” are given just a ritualistic slots. It is better that we collaborate with the Industry and make some live presentation to have a better view of the product and their benefits to the service of users. No papers so far have been generated from such collaborations.
End note:
The controversy of two papers has made me to react on the recent declining quality of LIS literature and no efforts are found to have attempted to link between classical thoughts and recent developments in the profession. I have appended my serious concern on the issues I thought would be seriously considered by the professionals specially youngsters to come out with quality contributions for the better of their self and for the profession as a whole.
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
