Descriptive study explores e-resource awareness and usage among faculty, suggesting improvement strategies.
AbstractThe purpose of this study is to explore the awareness and usage of electronic resources (e-resources) among faculty members at Sri Ramakrishna Engineering College. It aims to identify the extent of awareness, patterns of usage, preferred e-resource platforms, and challenges faced by faculty in accessing digital information. The study adopted a descriptive and analytical research design based on primary data collected through a structured questionnaire survey administered to faculty members from 13 departments. A total of 277 responses were obtained through random sampling. The collected data were analysed using both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques, including the Chi-square test, independent t-test, One-way ANOVA, and Pearson’s correlation coefficient, with a significance level set at p < .05. Statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29.0). The findings revealed that a majority of faculty members demonstrated a high level of awareness of e-resources such as IEEE (86.17%), Elsevier (67.98%), and Springer (64.43%), while Springer Open (50.59%), O’Reilly Open Books (35.97%), and Free Engineering Books (35.97%) were the most recognised open-access sources. A Chi-square test indicated a significant difference in satisfaction levels across e-resource platforms, ?²(18, N = 253) = 281.98, p < .001, with NPTEL receiving the highest satisfaction rating (80.24%). The Independent t-test showed that male faculty members reported slightly higher utilisation than female faculty members, t(251) = 2.42, p = .016, while ANOVA results indicated significant differences in awareness across age groups, F(3, 249) = 5.12, p = .002. A strong positive correlation was also found between awareness and utilisation, r(11) = .78, p = .002, confirming that higher awareness is associated with greater satisfaction and use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Muthuraj et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: