MLIS7505
Lindsay
Cronk
Lee
Hartle
Eli
Arnold
Drupal in Libraries
Introduction and Background
What do the White House, MTV, and hundreds of libraries
around the world have in common (Drupal, 2012)? They all use Drupal to
manage their websites. Traditionally, libraries relied on their physical
collection to entice patrons into their library, just as virtual libraries have
their always-available and asynchronous nature to attract users. This virtual
interaction can only be achieved, though, by providing a fully functional site
that is well designed and organized, allowing patrons to navigate and locate
information easily (Salazar, 2006, p. 170). One technology significantly
improving the overall usefulness of web sites is a content management system
(CMS). Simply put, a CMS is a complete computer system that manages
information, can be programmed in any computer language and run on any computer
system and allows data to be input, stored in a database, edited by authorized
users, and displayed to the public (Winters, 2008, para. 1). Drupal, the
choice among a growing number of libraries, is one such CMS.
Dries Buytaert created Drupal in 2000 while studying at the
University of Antwerp (Drupal.org, 2007, para. 1). Buytaert’s inspiration
was to find a way to easily collaborate and keep in touch with friends during
and after college. Drupal began as an online message board that quickly
evolved into an online web site and is now available as open source software
(Wiersma, 2009, p. 169). Buytaert had intended to use the Dutch word for
village, “dorp,” as a domain name for this online community. However, a
typo caused the site to be called drop.org. Drupal, pronounced “droo-puhl,”
derives from the English pronunciation of the Dutch verb “druppel,” meaning “to
drop” (Wiersma, 2009, p. 169). Although Buytaert’s name for his site did
not turn out as he had planned, his vision of creating an open, collaborative
website where people could develop and share their ideas has been fully
realized through Drupal.org.
Over time, the informal system developed by Buytaert and
other collaborators began to attract a larger audience, and it was this
synthesis of ideas born from drupal.org's burgeoning community that resulted in
the development of new ideas for the website, including systems for
syndication, moderation, and authentication (Drupalscience, n.d., para. 2). At
this expansion stage, Drupal already had many Web 2.0 features, including the
ability to create RSS feeds, moderation, user modes, forums, and blogs.
During the next few years due to the growth of its vibrant open-source
community and the evolution of web technology in general, Drupal changed
rapidly and went through several versions (v. 1.0 to 7.0). An enormous
number of new modules were added by the community to extend Drupal's basic
functionality for a variety of purposes.
Fennel (2007) states that as “libraries move
forward, many will likely be forced to address greater volumes of web content
and increased clamoring for more participation in the web presence on the part
of library staff” (p. 144). Others may see a rise in the demand for more
highly personalized services for end users. It therefore seems natural
that many libraries would find their way to the concept of CMS and Drupal, in
particular.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Drupal
presents the modern library with a powerful tool. In his essay on what he calls
“Drupalitization” Walter Nelson (2010) goes so far as to describe the CMS as a
means of “library empowerment” which creates better, more organized websites,
with content made more current and more usable by a collaborative of editors.
Powerful tools can be difficult for beginners to handle.
Taking a look at the advantages and disadvantages of Drupal can help
better evaluate both the CMS and its applications.
No
one can deny Drupal’s many advantages. It is a free and open-source CMS,
meaning it is free for use by all, and in the process of being made available
in this way it is constantly evolved and improved by web developers. This
online community can serve as expert advisors to libraries without full time
tech support. For these reasons, many cash-strapped libraries find Drupal to be
an attractive CMS solution (Reynolds, 2011a). Beyond this, Drupal Core
provides the bulk of basic features most libraries need from user account
registration and maintenance, to RSS-Feeds, to menu management, and system
administration and page layout customization. Libraries with developers, IT
staff, or adventurous amateurs on staff will appreciate Drupal’s flexibility to
create new templates. It offers flexible yet robust content creation,
advanced administrator controls, and content organization and management
programs (Harris, 2010). A massive collection of plugins and modules can
be used to customize Drupal to match a library’s needs, like the OPAC module
which allows for a library’s catalog to be seamlessly integrated into the
Drupal managed website (Austin & Harris, 2008b).
As
with any powerful and highly customizable resource, the key disadvantage of Drupal
could be said to be its greatest strength. By providing such a breadth of
options, it can seem overly complicated and difficult to grasp, (Harris, 2010).
Drupal is frequently accused of failing to be “user friendly”
(Morton-Owens, 2011). It can also be labor-intensive, which may overrule
the savings of cost in terms of a cost of time. Creating workflow systems
and managing settings requires a great amount of attention, and mistakes and
errors may cause systemic issues (Morton-Owens, 2011).
Ultimately,
by evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of Drupal, a simple assessment
of both becomes clear. Drupal’s strength as a tool is what makes it
difficult to master. In electing to use Drupal over other open-source CMS
solutions, library staff must be sure that they have the time and personnel
resources necessary to devote to gaining a comprehensive handle on this CMS.
By carefully assessing both the library’s needs and the software’s
functionality, a clear plan may be developed to implement Drupal, which can
avert frustrations and errors in transition.
Application in Practice
While
there are both advantages and disadvantages to all software, Drupal’s
highly-customizable options make it a viable program for use in all libraries,
both public and academic. There are features that allow for its
application in both types and features that are geared more toward one library
or the other. Along with the inherently unlimited nature of the open
source software, modules not already available can be created to support almost
any institutional goal.
Drupal’s system of modules that support and enhance its core
allow for the unlimited customization of content types. There are two
types of modules: core and contributed. Both types offer potential to
libraries. Austin and Harris (2008b) write of the potential for libraries
that use the core modules of blogs and book reviews. The use of blogs
allow libraries to change the all too often static nature of institutional
websites. Reynolds (2011b) takes the blogging one step further and is
able to use Drupal’s features to integrate her library-themed podcast into her
institution’s website. Further, the book review module brings the patrons
on board as contributors to the site. It allows them a stake in the
site, not just as a cursory visitor searching the catalogue for an item.
There is more of a buy-in from patrons if they are able to take a
participatory role in the site. Contributed modules also offer potential
for libraries.
Austin and Harris (2008b) describe the biography module that
allows a social network aspect of Drupal sites that parallels the feeling of
patrons’ buy in similar to the created book reviews. Patrons are able to
connect not just to the library but also to other library users. Through
this fostering of community, the library may take advantage of the higher level
of loyalty. Another contributed module known as FileField may prove more
useful to academic libraries. FileField allows for the uploading of file
to the Drupal site by users and administrators. College students who can
upload material for their college’s institutional repository could use this,
for example, and a professor could use the function to foster student support
of the library’s mission.
Kroski (2008) offers examples of the applications of Drupal
features in academic libraries. For example, the Mann Library at Cornell
provides students options to reserve study rooms in the library through Drupal.
Also, the University of Prince Edward Island displays its digitized
photograph collections through Drupal-created sites. Other schools
provide platforms for thesis submissions and easily findable subject guides.
Another example offered by Austin and Harris (2008c), would
be very useful for both public and private libraries. They explain the
idea that a module could be created to allow patrons to request the purchase of
new material through the Drupal-created site. The back-end of the site
could store this information in a database for easy access for librarians.
This could further be developed to allow for a running list of purchase
requests so that other patrons could offer their support for the purchase of
specific items.
Another important feature of Drupal that could be
successfully applied by libraries of all types is the option to connect
material from their online public access catalogues (OPAC) to their website in
a manner that is more pleasing to patrons than the often stagnant nature of
OPACs. Austin and Harris (2008a) give the example of linking all texts,
criticism, movies, etc of the play Hamlet together in the catalog so if
a patron searches for Hamlet, she would have immediate access to it all.
In academic libraries, the search could also link to archival material or
items in the special collections. It could also connect to material
located in the institutional repository, if applicable, or class syllabi from
related courses offered at the college.
There are also possibilities of applications on the back-end
side of Drupal-created sites that can be enjoyed by libraries. One such
example described by Morton-Owens (2011) is used by the New York University
Health Sciences Libraries (NYUHSL). Reminders are created automatically
when individual web pages are created in the NYUHSL system. After a
predetermined time has passed, the author of the page receives a message to
update the page so material remains current and the page reflects an update
stamp seen as a sign of currency by patrons. Another back-end feature
highly applicable to both public and academic libraries is the Drupal revision
history feature. Described by Huddle, Murphy, and Chesley Perry (2011),
this feature allows for administrators to access who has made changes and to
revert to previous versions if errors or sabotage occurs. They also
described the University Library at the University of California Santa Cruz’s
decision to utilize Drupal for its subject guides and article database list.
The “dynamic display” of Drupal offered patrons a non-static view (so
important to the tech-savvy patron of today) of options (Huddle, Murphy &
Chesley Perry, 2011, 192).
Conclusion
Drupal
allows such a high level of customization and user-input that nearly all
libraries can customize Drupal-based sites for their own purposes. While
no program is perfect, Drupal offers a body of converts and developers who are
more than willing to assist in answering users’ questions and issues.
More and more libraries are turning to Drupal as their CMS of choice, and
with more and more users, more will come to see the benefits of the open source
answer.
References
Austin,
A. & Harris, C. (2008a). Case studies. Library Technology Reports,
44(4), 31-36.
Austin,
A. & Harris, C. (2008b). Other modules of note. Library Technology
Reports,
44(4), 27-30.
Austin,
A. & Harris, C. (2008c). The trifecta. Library Technology Reports,
44(4), 23-26.
Drupal.org.
(2007). Drupal history as seen by Dries. Retrieved from
Drupal
Science. (n.d.). The history and evolution of Drupal.
Retrieved from
Fennell,
C. M. (2007). Content management and Web 2.0 with Drupal. Medical
Reference
Services Quarterly, 26, 143-167.
Harris,
C. (2010). Drupal gets easier. School Library Journal, 56(5), 14.
Hubble,
A., Murphy, D. A., & Perry, S. C. (2011). From static and stale to dynamic and
collaborative: The Drupal difference. Information
Technology & Libraries, (30)4, 190-197.
Kroski,
E. (2008). Drupal and libraries. Presentation given at the Computer in
Libraries 2008
Conference.
Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/ellyssa/drupal-and-libraries?src=related_normal&rel=2107760.
Morton-Owens,
E. G. (2011). Editorial and technological workflow tools to promote website
quality. Information Technology & Libraries, 30(3),
91-98.
Reynolds,
V. (2011a). I've seen the future, and it's surprisingly CHEAP! Computers In
Libraries,
31(10), 10-14.
Reynolds,
V. (2011b). Who doesn't like a good bargain? EventDV, 24(10),
11-14.
Salazar,
E. (2006). Content management for the virtual library. Information
Technology
&
Libraries, 25(3), 170-175.
Skalkos,
L. (2012). Migrating the Barnard Library zine collection website to Drupal.
Computers In
Libraries, 32(4), 12-16.
Wiersma,
G. (2009). Building online content and community with Drupal. Collaborative
Librarianship, 1(4), 169-171.
Winter,
J. (2008). What is a content management system? Retrieved
from
No comments:
Post a Comment