Investigator Information Form  

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: 

Name:  %Effort: Email:

Vandal ID:  Phone:

Address: 

Department: 

 

***Click here to add additional Investigators. The combined percent effort of all investigators must total 100%. 

 

FACULTY SPONSOR: 

Name:  Office:

Department:  Phone:

 

ELIGIBILITY FOR STUDENT GRANT PROGRAM: 

 Undergraduate                   Graduate                   Law               |               Full Time Student      Moscow Campus 

 

ARE YOU A FIRST‐TIME INVESTIGATOR?   Yes   No 

Have you previously received a grant from this program?   Yes   No 

If yes, have report(s) of previous grant(s) been submitted?   Yes   No 

 

Proposal Title: 

Amount Requested From SGP:   

 

Please provide a brief abstract of your proposal (Maximum 200 words): 

                   

 

RECOMMENDED EXTERNAL REVIEWERS: 

#1 Faculty/Staff Name:  Email:

Department: 

 

#2 Student Name:  Email:

Department: 

 

#3 Student Name:  Email:

Department: 

 

 

 

Project Type:       Basic Research              Applied Research             Outreach/Service            Instruction 

 

 

Yes  No  Click on title for more information  Explanation 

    Are Human Subjects Involved?  

 Assurance#                            Date: 

 

 

 

    Are Experimental Animals Involved?  

 Protocol#                               Date: 

 

 

 

    Are Biohazards, Recombinant DNA, or 

Radiation Involved?   Approval Date: 

 

 

 

    Are Select Agents or High Consequence 

Livestock Pathogens and Toxins Involved? 

 

 

 

    Is proposal subject to Export Controls or  

Re‐Export?  

    ITAR                 EAR 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Student Grant Proposal Committee University of Idaho

Dear SGP Committee,

With the constantly changing field of computer science and website development, a problem that has come about is the transferring of data from one website host to another in an efficient and reliable way.

Currently the method used lacks organization, control and leaves a large risk for lost data because it is generally left up to the department web administrator to delegate and orchestrate their own migration of data with no real oversight and no one person managing and directing where the data should go. Another major issue is that the current method of transferring web page data is page by page, which essentially is the equivalent of taking one folder at a time out of a file cabinet in order to move all of the contents of that file cabinet instead of just moving the whole file cabinet. Not only is that inefficient, it makes it much harder to maintain the same organization that you had in the first place so by migrating a website under the current system, there is a good chance that it will not be set-up the same way as the original website which could confuse visitors.

I have had the experience of working with the University of Idaho Finance and Administration department in their migration from the previous web host “Webedit” to the new host “Sitecore”. Working directly under the supervision of the departments web coordinator, I have been given the unique opportunity as a student to experience firsthand how this process is being executed along with experiencing the shortcomings of this method. Currently the process involves delegating out the migration tasks to each web author and leaving it up to them to orchestrate their websites migration and each individual page has to be transferred, one at a time along with any supporting data (pictures, documents, forms, external links, etc.). The shortcoming of this is that it not only puts even more of a workload on the web authors, but it leaves the organizational structure of the newly migrated data in the hands of many different web authors so the overall structure has a good chance of breaking; meaning that all of the links that were previously connected can become disconnected causing the “HTTP 404” error that you sometimes get while navigating the internet. Also, the previous layout of the website will be different which can cause confusion for visitors.

The main goal of a web development team is to create and maintain a site that is easy to navigate, inviting, and brings customers back and if you have a working product you do not want to mix up the flow of your website. For my research I will discuss with both the web management and the computer science department representatives to determine if there is a feasible way of “packaging” a site or at least larger groups of the site in order to transfer the data in a more organized and efficient manner. We will analyze four of the top content management systems which will include Joomla, Wordpress, Sitecore, and Umbraco. We will be studying the process and requirements for migrating large quantities of data from another server to these servers and will look for a discernible pattern that can be manipulated and edited to allow for easier “packaging” which will allow the transferring of multiple webpages at a time instead of the current one at a time process in place.

Student Grant Proposal Committee University of Idaho

Narrative

Objective

The use of computers is a relatively new, yet powerful tool that has opened up many doors and allowed businesses and individuals alike to accomplish tasks that would normally be too large. Because of the infancy of computers in the fields of both Information Systems and Computer Science, there are many seemingly small problems, or growing pains if you will that have causes significant issues that need to be addressed. One such problem is the ever changing software and web hosting platforms for large scale businesses and organizations such as the University of Idaho’s website.

The most concerning and problematic issue with migrating to a new content management system (CMS) is keeping the data as close to the original as possible. A great example to illustrate this is a current project I am working on with the U of I in their migration to the CMS “Sitecore” is in migrating the Administrative Procedures Manual which is a legally binding document that are the bylaws that direct the University. Because of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the wording for these documents, an extensive process has been put into place to transfer, clean up the code (when html; the code used to create webpages, is transferred in any way, it doesn’t always transfer cleanly can possibly add unnecessary code that needs to be removed in order to avoid errors), compare the new website to the old website to ensure that the wording is identical, and approve. This process is very time consuming, inefficient, prone to the possibility of human error, but all of it is necessary and so far it is the best process we have in place.

Because the use and power of computers has grown so rapidly in such a short period of time, many of the protocols and procedures as to how we take advantage of the many uses of the computers is left up to the overseeing organization or often up to the individual doing the job.

Importance

As explained above, the integrity of the data being transferred is priority above all else when transferring from one CMS to another. Next to that is the need for an efficient and fast way to complete this process so that a website isn’t being split up between two different CMS which will not only cause problems in trying to manage the data and keep it up to date, but can also potentially cause a discrepancy in the formatting between the pages on the different sites. With today’s technology, the expectation for adaptation, quick turnaround and instant information with little interruption is paramount and anything less will reflect poorly on the organization or person hosting the website.

Method

Student Grant Proposal Committee University of Idaho

I have selected four separate content management systems (Joomla, Umbraco, Sitecore, Wordpress) and will use these to analyze and compare the process of migrating to and from them in order to find any patterns, common problems or methods used in the migration process in order to get an idea of what specifically needs to be worked on and create a thesis on how to better the current CMS’s in the migration process. I will accomplish this by taking extensive notes as to the procedures that are currently used to transfer the data which can include, but is not limited to downloading/uploading the web page data, copy/pasting the data, or manually creating the new web pages from scratch. I will discuss this problem with a software programmer (preferably from the U of I computer science department so that the project will be 100% to the credit of the University of Idaho) and will try to formulate a program that we can write to allow us to transfer multiple web pages if not the whole site without having to break it up first.

Timeline

June 3-7: Study the whole Joomla process and tools used for site migration by experimenting with the transfer of all types of data from the other three CMS (Umbraco, Sitecore, and Wordpress). Contact the Joomla Company for all the specifications to their software and for any further questions that may arise throughout the week.

June 10-14: Study the whole Umbraco process and tools used for site migration by experimenting with the transfer of all types of data from the other three CMS (Joomla, Sitecore, and Wordpress). Contact the Umbraco Company for all the specifications to their software and for any further questions that may arise throughout the week.

June 17-21: Study the whole Sitecore process and tools used for site migration by experimenting with the transfer of all types of data from the other three CMS (Umbraco, Joomla, and Wordpress). Contact the Sitecore Company for all the specifications to their software and for any further questions that may arise throughout the week.

June 24-28: Study the whole Wordpress process and tools used for site migration by experimenting with the transfer of all types of data from the other three CMS (Adobe, Sitecore, and Ez Systems). Contact the Wordpress Company for all the specifications to their software and for any further questions that may arise throughout the week.

July 1-12: Contact various individuals who have stock in the use of CMS and get their feedback and input on the migration and maintenance of website data through the use of Joomla and Umbraco.

July 15-26: Contact various individuals who have stock in the use of CMS and get their feedback and input on the migration and maintenance of website data through the use of Wordpress and Sitecore.

July 29-31: Finalize all data collected, summarize and form a thesis as to the current pros and cons of CMS’s, the limitations with current technology in helping the migration of data, and possible improvements that can be made to help facilitate these migrations.

Student Grant Proposal Committee University of Idaho

Bibliography

• "Joomla - Fully Functional Content Management System."WebmasterFormat. N.p., 18 2012. Web. 12 Nov 2012. http://webmasterformat.com/tools/cms/joomla>.

• "WordPress Review: Most Popular Blogging Platform."WebmasterFormat. N.p., 04 2009. Web. 12 Nov 2012. <http://webmasterformat.com/tools/cms/wordpress>.

• "Umbraco Open Source ASP.NET CMS Review."WebmasterFormat. N.p., 18 2010. Web. 12 Nov 2012. <http://webmasterformat.com/tools/cms/umbraco>.

STUDENT GRANT PROGRAM

Equipment (itemized) Amount

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Equipment total:Materials and Supplies (itemized)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Materials and supplies total:Travel Costs (itemized)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Travel total:Personnel/Services (itemized)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Personnel/services total:Other Expenses (itemized)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Other total:

Subtotal:

Facilities and Administrative Costs (8%):

Your Current Total:

Total must NOT EXCEED $5000.00 Total Request:

Name:

Student ID #:Please fill out this form usning Adobe Acrobat

For all expenses listed under “Equipment” indicate on page 2 of this PDF who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed.

All items listed under “Other Expenses” must be accompanied by a justification statement on the 2 page of this PDF.

Justification ‐ For all expenses over $100 and those items listed under “Other Expenses”, describe the expenses such 

that reviewers and committee members will be able to immediately recognize the relevance and necessity of the items. 

For all expenses listed under "Equipment", indicate who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project 

has been completed. 

 

Equipment (itemized) Number: Who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed?

Justification for expense if over $100:

Number: Who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed?

Justification for expense if over $100:

Number: Who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed?

Justification for expense if over $100:

Number: Who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed?

Justification for expense if over $100:

Number: Who will assume responsibility for the equipment once the project has been completed?

Justification for expense if over $100:

Materials and Supplies (itemized) For all expenses over $100. Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Travel Costs (itemized) For all expenses over $100. Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

 

Personnel/Services (itemized) For all expenses over $100. Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

 

 

Other Expenses (itemized) Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense:

Number: Justification for expense: