Portals, Libraries, and Avoiding the Trash Bin

1. Portals, Libraries, and Avoiding the Trash Bin Computers in Libraries 2005 Missy Harvey Carnegie Mellon University harvey@andrew.cmu.edu March 2005

2. Portal Development atCarnegie Mellon University • Started Efforts in Fall 2001 • Released Portal Fall 2003 • Libraries Have Been a Major Part • Enabling Libraries to Become a More Prominent and Thriving Resource • Delivering Content Around the World • Mistakes and Lessons Learned • Libraries Involvement Along the Way

3. What is a Portal? A portal is: • a dynamic • customizable Web service • that offers content and • applications to • users based on their relationship with an institution A portal provides: • consistent navigation • as well as a consistent interface

4. Relationships Portal Content Targets Groups of Users = (Relationship) Users May Be: • Department Heads • Staff in History • Graduate Students in Physics • Student Members of a Student Organization

5. Portlets Portal Content is Delivered in Portlets / Channels Portlets Can Be: • E-mail • Calendars • Headlines • Surveys or Forms • RSS or XML Feeds • Results of JDBC Queries • Links to Existing Web Pages

6. Portal vs. Web Site • Web Site Information is Static • Every User Sees the Same Thing • Portal Information is Dynamic • Determined by Who They Are • What Groups They Belong To

7. Carnegie Mellon Composition • Core population is about 13,470 people: • 5389 Undergraduates • 4274 Graduate Students • 1300 Faculty • 2500 Full-Time Staff • 70,000+ Alumni • ProspectiveStudents • Research Partners

8. Distance Education • 16 Distance Education Programs • Remote Campuses • Remote Sites with In-Person and Online Courses • Collaborative Programs with Other Institutions • Executive Education Programs

9. Impact on University Libraries Adequate and Timely Services • Delivering Books to Faculty/Students in Remote Places • Expanding our Interlibrary Loan Procedures • Providing Database Services to Users Using a VPN or a Unique IP Address

10. Technical Issues • Authentication / Single Sign-On • WebISO / Pubcookie • Kerberos 5 • Shibboleth • Scalability • Unique E-Mail System • Use Existing Mail Programs • Mirrored Bboards • Event Calendar • Content Management System (CMS)

11. Event Calendar

12. Are Portals Really Becoming Necessary? On Our Existing Campus Web Site We Found: • Information was Hard to Find • People Used Bookmarks • Potential Security Problems Abounded • Lots of Redundant Web Work Underway Across Campus • Uncoordinated Institutional Image

13. Green, K. C. 2004 National Survey of Information Technology in U.S. Higher Education.

14. Why Should Libraries Care? • Disruptive ChangesBeing Driven By: • Cellphones • Entertainment Devices • Consumers of Content Whose Interests and Tastes are Supported by the Technology • Pay Attention to How Content Is: • Created • Found, and • Used by the Self-Sufficient but also Demanding and Discerning Information Consumer and Producer

15. Why Should Libraries Care? • Coordinated Management of Digital Assets of Institutions • Data Sets • e-Prints • Theses and Dissertations • Videos of lectures • More…. • Content Behaviors Have Changed • Potential to Increase Campus Presence

16. Resulting Vision • A Unified “Digital Dashboard” of Campus Services • Content Personalized To and Customized By Users • An Information Management Platform for the Web • An Infrastructure for University Information Management in General

18. Challenges Faced / Mistakes Made • Stakeholders • Problems getting allstakeholders on campus to become involved with the project from the start • Important to involve as many as possible in portal planning and implementation • Need to encourage the need to adhere to principles and tools that allow for all units to leverage unifying technologies

19. Challenges Faced / Mistakes Made • Interviewed Remote Campuses/Sites • Should have interviewed more remote campuses and sites to learn what worked and did not work for them • We brought them in later rather than earlier

20. Challenges Faced / Mistakes Made • Timing • Timing is can be crucial to success • One of our colleges on campus had already developed a portal to be used by their own people

21. Challenges Faced / Mistakes Made • Publishing Challenges • At the moment, most publishing of portlets has to be handled by Computing Services • This made sense initially but is causing other campus projects to be delayed • This problem is being addressed as we speak

22. Lessons Learned • President/Provost Involvement • Seek assistance from them, as well as all deans, to require involvement in such a major undertaking • Entire campus needs to understand the significance

23. Lessons Learned • Well-Defined Committee Structure • Set-up a well defined committee structure to oversee the portal development • Allow the committee structure to evolve as tasks are accomplished and the focus of activities change

24. Lessons Learned • Good Communication • Maintain good communication lines with the entire campus about developments with the portal • One tool we use is a Web site showing tools, presentations, training, etc. • http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/

26. Lessons Learned • Invest Substantial Time Choosing Portal Software • Decide what components of the package you need to buy from the vendor and what parts you can modify or develop from scratch with your own programming staff • We chose EpiCentric / Vignette

27. Lessons Learned • Collaborative Tools • Find easy and helpful collaborative tools to share communication within and between committees • We use a Wiki to share documents amongst our various subcommittees • Twiki site: http://twiki.org/

30. Lessons Learned • Design from a Customer Perspective • Simple to use • Dependable and predictable • Demonstrate value (or deliver results) • Make the user more self-reliant

31. Lessons Learned • Culture Change Will Be Needed • Users may need to be encourage dept. by dept. to see the potential • For those who’ve been at an institution longer, previous methods of communication and finding information are entrenched • The major trends—and challenges—are social and are profoundly changing how content is created, collected, used, shared and preserved

32. Lessons Learned • Capability to Gradually Change • The portal should change as the status and the activity in it changes • Successful portals are bi-directional, enabling users to make real-time transactions, such as finding timely information, using changeable scheduling, or using financial services

33. Lessons Learned • Strong Relationship Between the Library and Computing Services • Key to success • Allows for a strong library presence in portal development • Leads to improved visibility for the libraries • Opens the door for other new initiatives in the future

34. Present State (since Aug. 2004)

35. Usage by Student Group

36. What’s Ahead for the Near Future? • WebForum http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/ • Comprised of various subcommittees, each assigned with various tasks • The WebForum itself meets once per semester with all webmasters / stakeholders

37. Leadership Committee • Coordinate the meetings and communications of the Web Forum • Carry out the recommendations of the Forum • Suggest broad goals and priorities for the Web Forum • Create and manage subcommittees • Make tactical decisions in support of strategic goals set forth in the Forum

39. Content Management http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/content-management/ • Improve the timeliness of information • Improve the accuracy of information • Help make information easier to find • Help make Web sites and other information processes work more efficiently

40. Infrastructure http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/infrastructure/ • Focus on the evolution of the University's Web development toolkit and backend systems

42. Marketing http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/marketing/ • How do we communicate with our users? • What is the purpose of that communication? • How do we measure our effect? • How can we improve the user's experience without compromising necessary individuality? • What information do we want to gather from our collective Web services to better inform our efforts?

44. Portal http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/portal/ • What is our vision and strategy? • Tactical details of development efforts • Continue past work in usability • Identify applications to add • Look at targeting • Address interface design

46. Search http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/search/ • Determine whether we should develop and deploy an improved search system • If so, recommend a solution

48. Standards and Practices http://www.cmu.edu/webforum/standards-practices/ • How do Web professionals make best use of the university’s development toolkit? • Deal with Web testing for usability and accessibility

50. Library Involvement is Key • We have at least one library staff member on every subcommittee, as well as the overall Leadership Committee • We seek to collaborate on initiatives that are of interest to the libraries • We step up to volunteer for beta testing of applications of use in the libraries • We promote the portal from our library Web site and in library instruction