UNIVERSITY OF DAR ES SALAAM
PHEA WORKSHOP
04 Feb 2009
Venue: College of Engineering, UDSM Main Campus
1
Introduction
This report summarises the proceedings of the first visit by the SAIDE-CET Team to the
University of Dar Es Salaam (UDSM) to discuss and begin to plan the implementation of
the PHEA Educational Technology Initiative. This visit was aimed at introducing the
PHEA ETI concept to the university and developing a broad framework within which the
PHEA ETI strategy could be located.
UDSM is one of the seven institutions selected for the PHEA project1. The visit to UDSM
is the project’s third country visit after Uganda and Mozambique. Institutions were selected
on the basis of their expressed interest to participate in the initiative. The UDSM responded
positively to the invitation to participate in the project and provided all relevant
documentation in this regard. Policy, strategies and activities in the field of e-learning and
the use of computers to enhance the business of the university is well underway at a
number of level. For instance the institution is in the process of finalising their ICT policy
and strategy documents. In addition they are piloting a number of e-learning programmes
from 2009. The University also showed its commitment by ensuring this strategic planning
workshop was well organised. Unlike in the Ugandan case, the facilitation team did not
transport all the documentation; instead, this administrative preparatory work was done by
the institution.
In general, the workshop was successful in establishing initial contact and outlining the
PHEA ETI goals. The university expressed a keen interest to participate in the project in
order to extend and deepen existing expertise in the educational technology field, which
was acknowledged by the university team to be limited.
The first two days focused on developing the framework for an institutional Educational
Technology Strategy and Plan. These two days focused on exploring the relationship
between the institution’s challenges and the use of technology and included a focus on
institutional policies and projects. The third day focused on developing an educational
1
There are only two public universities in Dar es Salaam, UDSM being the main
university and the University of Dom. UDSM staff minimum requirements for
employment are an MA. Fees are generally about US $1000 per year.
2
technology research agenda for the institution. The idea was to develop a comprehensive
strategy that goes well beyond the scope of the PHEA Initiative to ensure that the
institution drives the initiative and that it fits into their overall vision and plan.
Days One and Two: Strategic Planning Workshop
Before the workshop, an introductory meeting was held with the Dean of the Faculty of
Informatics and Virtual Learning (FIVE) and the Director, Centre for Virtual Learning
(CVL). This brief meeting, in the dean’s office served as an orientation session for the
SAIDE/CET team as well as for these key UDSM staff. The Faculty of Informatics and
Virtual learning oversees a range of ICT programmes and includes three divisions;
electronics and communications studies, computer science and the centre for virtual
learning. The Centre for Virtual Learning offers technical support to all academics in the
design and delivery of ICT mediated distance learning.
The SAIDE-CET team had been told that over 40 staff had been invited to attend the
workshop. Attendance varied considerably between day one and two. On day one, there
were 30 participants (24 male and 6 female) which dropped to about 14 by the end of day
two. Some of this can be accounted for by the fact that senior managers were only able to
attend the workshop for a few hours on the first day. Overall, low attendance figures could
also be attributed to the fact that technology is not utilised in many departments and only
those who were involved in the use of technology remained for both days. Two further
reasons for low attendance are worth noting: firstly, students, and therefore, classes, were
suspended in October which meant that not all staff travel in to their offices on campus
each day. (The issue of travel costs was raised in relation to the workshop costs.) The other
reason is that the Centre for Virtual Learning is located within a new faculty, the Faculty of
Informatics and Virtual Learning (FIVE). It may be that this arrangement does not
encourage as much cross-faculty collaboration as would be the case if it were located more
centrally. Poor attendance was also attributed by double workshops that were conducted
by CVL and members who were supposed to attend the other workshop were the same who
had to attend the PGDE online workshop.
3
Day 1: Getting to grips with the initiative
Session 1: Orientation and Welcome
The VC officially opened the workshop by reading a speech on the importance of
integrating ICTs into the institution. He also reiterated the commitment of the institution to
participate in the initiative. The VC highlighted that in order for the adoption of educational
technologies to be successful ‘there was a process of transcendence needed for staff to get
rid of their fears of loss of income through adoption of technology’. He indicated the
importance of using technologies to support the institution in order to meet the demand for
increased access to higher education.
Session 1: PHEA ETI Introduction (Fatima Adam)
A brief overview of the PHEA ETI was presented in order to set the scene for deliberations
over the next three days. This presentation included an outline of the partners (including
funders), the project vision, project purpose and objectives. This session was intended to
provide the institution with details of the initiative. This provided a framework within
which the workshop outcomes were located and was followed by a discussion on the
purpose of the workshop as well as the roles and responsibilities of SAIDE/CET and the
university.
The following key questions were raised, which focussed largely on funding and roles and
responsibilities:

Can the Initiative employ local expertise where available?

Does the Initiative fund the universities costs to develop the proposal?

How many projects will be funded through this initiative and who decides this?
4

Will the 7 institutions have to compete for the funds?

Is the pie equally shared amongst the 7 institutions?

Will the university be part of the decision-making team that determines projects and
budgets?

If this is a partnership, will the university have the opportunity to make input over
the workshop sessions?
It was explained that if expertise were needed, this would be sourced in the institution and
country before seeking outside assistance. It was also explained that at the pre-proposal
level, some groundwork would need to be done by the university without remuneration.
However at the implementation stage, resource allocations will be made for work that
needs to be done. Other matters regarding the 7 institutions and funding were also clarified.
Sessions 2: Possibilities of educational technologies (Fatima Adam).
This session focused on the possible uses of technology to support teaching and learning as
well as. for administration, management and communication purposes. It presented this
through a pre and post scenario approach. For example what did a student’s academic life
look like before computers and after their introduction? Participants were overwhelmed by
this presentation and some thought that it may be too ambitious for UDSM, particularly in
the light of the access and skills challenges that they face. It was explained that the
presentation reflects on a range of possible uses of technology in educational contexts and
does not suggest that the university embark on all of these; rather, the institution should
focus on a programme that is relevant to its own context as well as realistic and achievable
within the short to medium term.
Session 3: Challenges and possibilities (Group sessions facilitation by Sharman
Wickham and Fatima Adam)
5
These sessions focused on the institutional challenges and needs. It did not look specifically
at the use of technology but rather spent time focussing on the institution as a whole. This
was done to ensure that deliberations about technology were located in the context of the
institutional realities. It was intended to create a framework within which decisions about
the integration of technology were informed by wider institutional issues rather than as an
end in-itself.
For this activity participants formed three groups of 6. In four stages, they were asked to:

Identify challenges and difficulties they faced in their roles as educators

Suggest how educational technology could solve these problems

Group the challenges according to themes

Prioritize these challenges
The group discussions resulted in high levels of participation and discussion, evident in the
plenary feedback sessions. There was widespread agreement on the challenges and needs
across the groups. However groups seemed to focus more on the solutions instead of the
problems. This is probably due to the fact that the problems are taken for granted and the
institution is focused on trying to find effective solutions. Interesting debates were raised
about the differences between attitudes and awareness in terms of the use of technology.
Another key discussion focused on whether mindsets must change first or whether
expertise and technology introduction could catalyse mindset changes.
Group discussions were lively and rich. After much discussion, the groups indicated the
following key challenges and needs:
Group 1
1. Knowledge and Expertise in technological use:

Training

Awareness
6

Research
2. Supportive mechanisms

Improve access to labs

Increase ICT facilities

Improve management of ICT facilities

Alternative source of power
3. Cultural barrier

Reduce fear
Group 2
1. Mindset and attitude

Low motivation

Reluctance to change

Sensitization
2. Expertise and skills development

Staff training

Technical support

Retention
3. Information management

Sharing information

Storing and retrieval of information
4. Facilities

Access is limited

Physical space

equipment

sustainability and under utilisation
5. Large classes
7
Group 3
1. Infrastructure

Low or no bandwidth

Limited access to network points
2. Shortage of Educational Technology Expertise
3. Integration of ET with other systems

ARIS

FIS

LIBIS

Accommodation
4. Lack of awareness
5. Policies and strategies to support ET

Procurement and funding

Management
6. Localization of ET
Day 2: Focusing on possible technology investments
Session 1: Working towards fundable projects (Fatima Adam)
This session detailed the requirements for the submission of a successful proposal to
funders. It indicated that the Educational Technology Strategy and Plan that will be
developed during these sessions should go well beyond the scope of the PHEA ETI so as to
be used to source funding from a range of other funders. This holistic approach ensures that
the PHEA initiative is integrated into the broader institutional strategy and does not
constitute a piecemeal and fragmented approach to integrating technology into the
institution. It also ensures that the PHEA Initiative builds on what already exists within the
institution. It was explained that the proposal will be developed by the institution in
partnership with CET/SAIDE and includes a research component.
Some questions that arose:
8
Can the funds be used for infrastructure? It was explained that in general these funds will
not be allocated for infrastructure and that the focus is on teaching and learning.
Is there an assumption that the institutions have enough infrastructure? It was explained
that while the funders recognised that institutions did not have sufficient infrastructure, this
initiative is focused on improving the use of existing technologies and innovating around
the use of technology for teaching and learning. This it is expected has the potential to
change mindsets and leverage significant change which can catalyse the effective use of
technology and mobilise funds for additional investment.
Can the project funds be used for technical or academic staff exchange expertise from
other institutions? Yes, although it is preferable to start with local expertise.
Is exchange expertise limited to program partners? No, expertise is sought wherever it is
available.
Is the program only interested in what is already in existence or can new things be started?
The Initiative is not limited to projects already in existence and can include new things.
However, it would be best to begin with what already exists.
Session 2: Current status of e-learning at UDSM (Dr Twaakyondo, Director CVL)
Microsoft Office
PowerPoint 97-2003 Presentation
In this session, Dr Twaakyondo provided an overview of the institution’s technology
policies, strategies and projects. This report indicated that an institutional technology policy
is well underway and in the process of being approved. In addition, there are several
administration, financial and management systems in place including an LSM. Certain
sections of the institution have been using Blackboard but have migrated to an open source
solution (Moodle). In terms of technology use in education, this was primarily focused on
the delivery of distance education programmes. This included the development of the
following programmes that will be offered over the next few years:
9

Postgraduate Diploma in education which will be implemented in 2009

Postgraduate Diploma in engineering management which will be implemented in
2009

Undergraduate programme in commerce (Bacholor of Business Administration)
which will be implemented in 2010.
They also intend to introduce an undergraduate programme in Law which is still in its
conceptualisation stage.
These programmes combine face to face with distance elements. Computers are used to
provide students with the necessary course materials as well as some guidelines about what
content should be covered on a monthly basis.
In terms of infrastructure, the institution indicated that they do not have sufficient
computers and student access is quite a challenge. This point was contested by some
participants who suggested that current access points and computer facilities are not being
used optimally. UDSM are using a fibre optic capable but are presently experiencing
serious bandwidth problems. They also have very few connection points in classrooms,
staff rooms, libraries and other important learning sites.
Questions focused on the status of the policy document, on concerns about the quality of elearning programmes and of the concern that the Centre for Virtual Learning is not well
marketed (see the earlier addition regarding the structural position of CVL in FIVE). There
is also some tension about the fact that all students have to do a computer literacy course
and this takes away time from the timetable for disciplinary learning. It was argued that
this results in overburdening students with courses and can compromise the quality of core
disciplines that students need to complete.
Session 3: Identification of possible investment priorities (Group work)
This session started with a recap of the session on challenges that took place on day 1. The
idea was to link challenges with possible investments. At this stage the issue of the
10
bureaucratic approach was raised as it did not feature in day one’s discussion on
institutional challenges. Some participants felt that this approach hinders the institution’s
core business i.e. learning, teaching and research.
It was suggested that the bureaucracy is linked to national was well as institutional
requirements and some matters are out of the jurisdiction and control of the institution. It
was also noted that some bureaucratic challenges could be changed by ICT but others may
just be exacerbated by it.
This session suggested that the primary concern of the institution is about large classes and
the demands for increased access to higher education. It was felt that educational
technology could support some of the challenges that are emerging in this regard; however,
this can only be done if the necessary expertise amongst staff exists. The issue of staff
capacity to deliver courses through the use of educational technologies was highlighted.
Underlying this were the twin issues of traditional mindsets and of staff training.
Following the recapping of challenges groups were asked to:
1. Identify 3/4 investment possibilities for educational technology
2. Agree on the problems or challenges that these address?
3. Align it with the particular strategic objectives identified in the institutions policy
documents.
Session 4: Plenary Report Back
Group 1
Overall problem
Investment possibilities
Strategic
objectives
in
Institutional policy
Shortage
of
e-learning Expertise development
Develop
capacity
of
institution to deliver ICT
11
expertise
Shortage
Training workshops
of
programmes
technical Mentoring
expertise
Inadequate
access
to Increase
capability
of Improve ICT infrastructure
network points and low wireless network
bandwidth
Increase access points in
labs, staff offices, homes,
student hostels
Increase bandwidth
Increase demands for higher Strengthen
the
satellite ICT
education
campus ICT capacity
Overcrowding at university
Establish
mediated
distance
learning
new
satellite
more
online
centres
Develop
courses
Group 2
Objective: provide greater access to higher education
1. Enhance awareness and create positive attitude towards ICT mediated learning
2. Build capacity to transform traditional educational programmes
3. Establish undergraduate e-learning programmes
4. Deliver ICT mediated programmes
12
5. Other: conduct research on effective utilisation of ICT facilities, research on
developing how technology can be used to develop more efficient systems in the
university and installation of power back up systems.
Group 3
1. Development of knowledge base for e-learning at UDSM

Digitising teaching material

Developing skills

Developing student-teacher interaction forums

Create bank of content for teachers
2. Develop postgraduate e-learning programmes
3. Conducting e-learning research

Use of ICT mediated systems to reduce delays on postgraduate supervision
decisions

Challenge of adopting ICT in developing country contexts

Situation analysis

Best practices
Summary of Key priorities for investment
1. Skills development
2. Strengthening existing e-learning programmes
3. Support the digitisation of course materials
13
4. Build research capacity (this includes academic research on e-learning as well as
capacity to conduct audits and needs analysis)
Session 5: Next steps for Strategy Workshop
This session focused on the next steps required and included a range of activities that need
to be competed before the second visit in about 5-6 months time. These included the
following:
Activity2
Time
1. Analyse UDSM ICT 20 Jan 2009
Responsible
UDSM
policies
2. Collate
all
key 25 Jan 2009
UDSM
ICT 30 Jan 2009
CET-SAIDE
documents
3. Comment
on
policy and documents
4. Provide information on 25 Jan 2009
UDSM
relevant ICT structures
and decision making
processes
5. Set up committee to 20 Jan 2009
develop
UDSM
Educational
Technology Plan
6. Nominate Coordinator 20 Jan 2009
UDSM
to take responsibility
for
liaison
between
2
Please note that these set of activities can change. Also that a number of other activities will be included
as the project proceeds.
14
SAIDE/CET
and
UDSM
7. Conduct
Audit
on: 15 Feb 2009
UDSM or consultant
What exists in terms of
e-learning?

LMS , who is using
what
Moodle,
Chisimba,
for
what
purposes etc

What
training
has
taken place to date and
who has attended these
sessions?
– 12 Jan 2009
SAIDE-CET
9. Proposal template to be 20 Jan 2009
SAIDE-CET
8. Workshop
report
SAIDE/CET
sent to committee
10. Draw from the report 2 Mar 2009
key
UDSM, SAIDE-CET
investment
priorities
11. Develop criteria and 15 Mar 2009
SAIDE-CET
process for prioritising
investments
in
e-
learning
15
12. Prepare Draft ETS for 30 April 2009
SAIDE-CET
discussion
13. Feedback on Draft ETS 20 May 2009
UDSM
It was recommended that some of the ways in which we operate within this project should
model e-approaches. Therefore some discussions could be held online and information
made accessible to all online. It was agreed that the UCT website created for this initiative
would be made accessible to the team for this purpose.
DAY 3: A Research Journey
Session 1 – Introduction to research, the Think Tank document, the Research
Design Toolkit and the two research textbooks
This session started at 09h31 with only nine participants. It began by introducing the
documentation associated with the session: the Think Tank Conceptual Framework, the
Research Design Toolkit, and the two textbooks by Cohen & Manion and Booth et al. It
was explained that one of the two sets of textbooks would go to the CVL in FIVE while
the other would be given to the library.
Some explanation of the context in which the Think Tank Conceptual Framework had
been developed by CET was given. It was explained that it highlights issues,
interventions, implementation and investigations related to ICTs in higher education and
reflects work in progress. It was also explained that the document is an important
resource for anyone interested in educational technologies. Participants were referred to
the main headings used in the matrix and it was pointed out that some of these had been
changed to include a regional/continental layer as well as inclusion of course domains.
16
Participants were encouraged to look at the way in which findings had been inserted at
the various levels, e.g. on pages 23 and 29. In addition, participants were encouraged to
look at the reading list that could be used to start focus their thinking about research
possibilities. In addition, participants were alerted to the value of the OER website. Other
documentation related to PHEA ETI project including the work of participating
universities could also be sourced from the website.
The session moved on to the Research Design Toolkit, its design (questions, activities
and resources for individual and collaborative work) and contents (covering the research
journey). Sharman indicated she would focus on Sections A and B during the rest of the
day. It was explained that this was a resource that could be used in drafting research
proposals which would then be finalised after the second visit to the institution and the
activities help to develop thinking about what to research and how to research it. The
inclusion of the Think Tank Conceptual Framework in the Research Design Toolkit was
explained.
Participants were then encouraged to study aspects of the Research Journey map, e.g.
initial questions raised in everyday life, how these might be translated in the Think Tank
matrix, gate-keeping, the difficulties of data analysis especially when it is unplanned for,
funding, project management, etc. After the journey, the researcher makes a contribution
to a field of knowledge, much as is done in the Think Tank document.
Q. Is all research meant to solve a problem? It was explained that it depends on how we
interpret the term “problem”; most research is about addressing questions to which
answers are yet known (although they may be assumed or hypothesised) and these
questions arise from problems or possibilities.
Session 2 – Completing the activity associated with the Research Journey Map and
Mapping UDSM Research
17
As the first session had started late, it was necessary to use some of the following session
to answer some of the questions related to the activity of studying of the Research
Journey map. This activity was complicated by the arrival of additional participants,
some of whom had not attended any of the sessions on the previous two days. In all, 18
people were present. Although there was a request to repeat the previous session, it was
explained that this was not possible since certain other activities had to be completed
before the end of the day. It was suggested that the new participants join in groups with
hose who had been present in the first session in order to do the associated activity.
Prior to tackling the activity, there was a question related to gatekeepers – are there not
additional gatekeepers in other places in the research journey? Possible additional
gatekeepers were described including those who decide who gets admitted to the research
fraternity and who gets kept out. It was explained that decisions may be based on
previous qualifications as well as methodological or theoretical interests. Gate-keeping
ensures that there is rigor in the thinking and planning of a project and in ensuring the
quality of proposals, the appropriateness of the theoretical framework and the
methodology etc.
The activity required participants to answer the following questions:
1. What aspects of the Research Journey Map resonate with your previous
experience of research journeys?
2. What areas of the Map might be new and relatively unfamiliar to you?
3. Where do you think your own research-related strengths lie?
4. Are there any areas where you see a need for further development?
5. Have your previous research journeys been undertaken individually or
collectively / in a team?
Participants were requested to write brief responses to the questions on flipchart paper
and to hand these in after the session. Although participants complained that there had
not been sufficient time to address the questions, it was argued that research deadlines for
18
the PHEA project are going to be tight and the importance of working to timelines will be
modeled in the workshop activities.
In explaining the importance of the next focus – that of mapping recently completed and
ongoing research in ICTs at USDM – the links between the institutional technology plan,
the broader research agenda and research proposals for the PHEA funders were
explained.
Sophie Mgaiwa then spoke to a powerpoint presentation entitled UDSM completed and
ongoing e-learning activities and research (see attached).
Microsoft Office
PowerPoint 97-2003 Presentation
In summary, this presentation began with an explanation of how the expansion of primary
and secondary education in Tanzania has led to challenges of access and large classes in
higher education. It is hoped that e-learning will provide broader access in an affordable
way. UDSM is the main public university in Tanzania with 18 000 of the 46 296 higher
education students; 1 200 staff and 50 programs offered.
In 1998, educational technology was introduced to enhance independent learning.
Blackboard was the LMS used and ICT labs were built. In 2001, UDSM established the
Instructional Technology Resources Unit which provided staff training for effective elearning. In addition, video conferencing facilities, increased bandwidth and a digital
library were acquired.
UDSM has been involved in inter-institutional collaboration to offer programs with other
African universities and Curtin University. USDM spearheads the Tanzanian Education
Network project.
19
The following challenges were then outlined: under utilization of available resources and
retention of traditional methods; and weaknesses in policies, strategies, resources and
structures to effectively implement e-learning. In addition, the lack of feasibility studies
on successful implementation of e-learning within the UDSM context was highlighted.
Requirements for meeting the challenges were then outlined. The need for CVL to act as
a driver of e-learning and to work across faculties, infrastructure provision at specific
regional centres based on an infrastructure audit / needs analysis, the development of
expertise among learners and academic staff as based on a skills audit / needs analysis,
instructional designers, programs and multimedia producers, technical expertise.
A range of resources are required to determine the specific needs (skills and
infrastructure). In addition, strategies used should ensure that content is reusable and that
appropriate software programmes are used. Institutional e-learning policy is needed –
defining implementation, addressing barriers to implementation, giving support
structures, defining e-learning standards for development, structure and support.
The following were listed as items on the Research Agenda: institutional mandate saves
time, innovative ways of using educational technologies, instructional design, use of
different technologies, skills development needed for implementing e-learning.
A key concern raised following the presentation was that it was not representative of the
research at the institution. Various participants pointed to recently completed and
ongoing research that had not been included in the presentation. It was suggested that the
presentation had focused on the issues (at both national and institutional levels) that
influence ICTs in UDSM rather than on actual research projects. It was also suggested
that a further audit be conducted to develop a more inclusive picture and to facilitate
greater collaboration across the institution in future research projects. (see Task List)
The activity associated with the development of an institutional research agenda was then
introduced. Participants were asked to cluster the issues in the previous presentation into
themes, and to identify possible research questions for projects. In addition, they were
20
asked to begin identifying potential participants for these projects. Although concerns
were raised that this activity would be flawed as the presentation had not included all the
institutional projects, it was suggested that it be used as a test run. Where participants had
knowledge of other projects, they were encouraged to draw on this.
Session 3 – The development of a research agenda
After lunch, participants formed two groups (5 X 2) to work on the activity described
above. It was clear that many participants found this activity challenging and they were
asked to comment on their engagement in the process before speaking about the content
of their deliberations. In doing so, some spoke of the challenges they experienced in
using certain concepts, in defining these and in developing clarity on the terminology. As
one said, the thinking process was easy but recording it was a challenge. Another said
that his group had engaged in debates and arguments, and that there was often
disagreement. A participant pointed out that the broad discussions in the groups were not
reflected in the limited data written on paper. Another commented that the exercise did
not seem to have clear parameters, and that the group could have continued for a while
longer if they had been given more time.
It was explained that collaborative studies often make for more disagreements as people
have their own positions and struggle for ascendancy. Once again, the important issue of
timeframes was raised; funds are usually released in tranches based on researchers
meeting deliverables.
The two groups recorded their deliberations as follows:
Group 1 (all staff members of CVL)
Kennedy Frank
Mulembwa Numdku
Sophie Mgwaza
Buola Sagarda
21
Maximillian Makungu
This group suggested the following areas for inclusion in the research agenda:

Effectiveness of E-learning systems

Situational Analysis of E-learning at UDSM

Use of cellular telephone technology to support and enhance E-learning
Group 2
Although there were five participants in this group, only two recorded their names. These
were:
Tiffan Mvula and Suzana J. Pombe. Both are located in CVL.
They suggested the following:

Situational Analysis of the e-learning system at UDSM

Dissemination of teaching and learning materials
Given the concerns noted around the lack of information regarding recently completed
and ongoing research, these areas for research need to be treated as provisional.
Session 4 - Next steps for researchers and closure
It was agreed that
1. Sophie will update her presentation on completed and current e-learning research
at UDSM. This needs to be distributed to all participants through the CVL.
2. All participants will read the Think Tank Conceptual framework (3 – 4 weeks
time). 30 Jan 09
3. All participants should read the SAIDE-CET Report on the workshop and
comment on this. 15 Jan 09
4. Participants should meet as a group to:
22
(a) Read section C of the Research Design Toolkit together (Get someone to
capture discussion)
(b) Do activity 3a as a group
(c) Do activities 4a – c together (there may be smaller group divisions here)
(d) Do activities 5a – g together
5. Participants should send Sharman the 1st draft of first section of proposal. By 30
March 09
Selection of committee
It was agreed that the following participants should form the project committee.
1. Mr Tumsifu – rep associate dean academics from Faculty of Commerce
Management
2. Dr E Kesi – Faculty of Arts and Social Science
3. Mr J Mohamed – Engineering – postgraduate coordinator
4. Mr Muzale – CCE
5. Dr Katabaro – DUCE
6. Dr Kafanabo – Faculty of Education
7. Dr Ndaro – Faculty of Aquatic Science and Technology
8. Sophie Mgaiwa – CVL
9. Mr Munaku – CVL
10. Dr Twaakyondo – CVL
It was also agreed that this committee will put together a subcommittee to work further
on the research agenda – although not necessarily carry out all aspects of the research
23
projects. This subcommittee could include people who had not been able to participate in
the workshop.
CVL will coordinate the circulation of documents from CET/SAIDE.
Although the need for participants to compete evaluation forms had been spoken of each
day, it became clear that these would also need to be circulated to participants via email
as only 7 forms were available for collection. CVL undertook to do this.
24
Interview with Director of the Library: Prof Alice G. Nkhoma-Wamunza
The Director of the Library, Prof Alice G. Nkhoma-Wamunza, had invited three staff
members to join the discussion3. After an introduction to the PHEA project, a number of
questions were raised for discussion.
The two resources purchased for the PHEA ETI were handed over to Prof NkhomaWamunza. During the interview Prof Nkhoma-Wamuza noted that it is usually more
useful to locate such resources in the main library rather than in the Departmental
libraries since the former have professional staff to advise students and staff and their
hours are longer than those of the Departmental libraries.
I indicated that it would be useful for the SAIDE-CET team to understand the resources
available to staff who would participate in the PHEA ETI project. Prof Nkhoma-Wamuza
explained that Carnegie grants have been used for the purchase of resources for the
library for the past three years: In the first and third years, these were used to purchase
“general resources” (across all Faculties), while, in the second year, resources for Science
and Engineering were the focus of the grants. Funding from Cida has also been used to
acquire electronic databases.
When asked whether academic staff would be able to search for literature from their
desks, Prof Nkhoma-Wamunza said that this would be possible “provided that they have
the skills to use the search engines”. The library provides training for both students and
staff but not all the latter make use of this facility.
The library also has highly qualified staff to assist academics who do not yet have the
necessary skills to do their own searches.
3
Prof Nkhoma-Wamunza said that she would like to have attended the workshop but had not received the
invitation which Dr Twaakyondo said he had sent.
25
Searches undertaken can go beyond the University of Dar es Salaam. Inter-library loans
will depend on the funds available. No such loans were made in the final semester of
2008 as all the funds for these had been used in the first semester. A document delivery
service is available but, once again, this is dependent on funds.
When asked whether institutional research conducted at UDSM was collected in the
library, it was reported that only the formal qualifications (M and PhD theses) were
collected. There have been discussions about ways in which to digitize these and to
capture research done at this level throughout Tanzania. When pressed about other
institutional research reports, the process followed was outlined. It is the responsibility of
the researchers to deposit a copy of the final report with the Research and Publications
office. Again, plans are afoot to develop an institutional repository.
The library has wireless internet.
Library policy and regulations can be found on the institutional website.
In closing we agreed that the library is an important support structure for the PHEA
project and especially for the research element of this. In addition to providing academics
with support, it was agreed that it would be useful for the library to develop and keep
updating bibliographies on ICTs and higher education. The library staff in the meeting
were given the project website address and encouraged to use the information here.
26