Awareness and extent of participation of library committee members in the performance of their roles and functions among SUC’s in Iloilo Province

Abstract

This study aimed to determine the level of awareness and extent of participation of library committee members, to find out the differences between awareness and extent of participation when respondents vary according to college/department affiliation and classification and to determine the relationship between the library committee members’ awareness and extent of participation in the performance of their roles and functions.

The study utilized the one-shot survey design. The sample size of forty (40) members of library committee of State Universities and Colleges in Iloilo Province was purposely selected through total enumeration method. The data were gathered by using the researcher-constructed questionnaire based on the instrument used by Miss Margaret Cressaty for the research to determine the function of the library committee of California College of Medicine, University of California. Frequency distribution, percentage and means were used as descriptive statistics while, inferential statistics like ANOVA and Spearman Ranks were used to analyze the data.

During the conduct of the study, most of the participants come from the twenty percent members of the College of Education affiliation. However, most of the respondents classified as department chairs had the greater participation as members of the committee while of those students’ representation is disproportionate.

The most notable items that respondents expressed high awareness was on their major roles and functions as liaison officer (2.88), this is followed by forerunner on library promotion, marketing and services (2.63), and as an advisory body (2.38) respectively. The specific roles and functions they perceived awareness are both from their roles and functions as liaison officer that recommends library materials to be purchased by the library and helps the librarian selects library materials for evaluation and acquisition by visiting bookstores and book fairs. This kind of awareness is expressed by 38 (95.0 percent) of the respondents. This dominates most of their roles and functions as library committee members.

Despite the fact that majority (95.0 percent) of the respondents are aware of their roles and functions as library committee member there are still 16 (40.0 percent) or two fifths of the respondents who are not aware of their roles and functions as an advisory body which guides the library staff in all future programs/services of the library.

On the other hand, the most noticeable members of library committee who are much aware and participated most their specific roles and functions when classified according to college affiliation was the Engineering department as shown by the over-all mean score of M=2.94 and M=4.37 respectively. On the other hand, when members were classified according to committee membership, librarian and students lead the rest of the members with an over-all mean score of M=3.00. While based on their high degree of participation, still librarians stand out among other members followed by faculty members with an over-all mean score of M=4.22 and M=4.10 respectively. However, it was noted that student membership in the committee who found out to be the less among the committee membership with the over-all mean score of M=3.20.

The data further reveals that more than one-third (35.0 percent) of the respondents showed high level of participation in the performance of their roles and functions with high level of awareness but none can be found from respondents with high level of awareness with low level of participation. In addition, it was noted that there were no responses on high participation in an average level of awareness.

Moreover, less than half (45.0 percent) of the respondents had discharge in an average level of participation on high level of awareness and ten percent of the respondents responded in an average awareness with an average participation.

However, 10.0 percent of the members had expressed their low participation in the performance of their roles and functions in an average level of awareness.

In general, the data further showed that four-fifths (80.0 percent) of the total respondents had participated in the performance of their roles and functions with high level of awareness and only twenty percent had signified their participation with an average degree of awareness.

However, no significant difference was noted between the respondents’ college affiliation and classification and respondents’ awareness on their roles and functions. But, on their major roles as advisory body, a significant difference was distinguished between the respondents’ classification and awareness.

It was further found out that regardless of respondents’ personal characteristics such as college affiliation and classification, level of awareness and participation was high which was shown by an over-all mean score of M=2.63 and M=3.69 respectively. This finding was supported by the results of the ANOVA. In an addition, it only shows that the significance of an active performer relies on how much awareness he has on that particular role and function.

Hence, it was noted that a significant relationship exists between the respondents’ awareness and extent of participation in the performance of their roles and functions as committee members. The Spearman Rank test for relationship had a value (r=.56O, p=.000) which probability value is lesser than .05 level of significant. The result implies that the respondents’ participation is significantly related to their awareness on the roles and functions as committee members. This means that when respondents’ participation was high they are most likely highly aware of their roles and functions. This finding was supported by the results of Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient.