Cambridge
Spreadsheet Quality
Foundations of Spreadsheet
Workshop 2004
Margaret Burnett
Oregon State University and
the EUSES Consortium
Cambridge
What are some of the right
questions?
(Starts here, continues via brainstorming
session later)
2
Questions:
1.
Can we “fix the system” to automatically
prevent/detect (some) errors: augmented
systems?
2.
Can we “fix the system” to work together
better with users in finding/fixing errors?
3.
Can we “fix the user” to make them care
more about errors?
4.
Can we “fix the user” so that they get
better at avoiding errors (“tidy user”)?
5.
Can we enforce fixes to the user?
Cambridge
3
The EUSES Consortium’s
Dependability
Research Question
Cambridge
Is it possible to bring the benefits of
rigorous software engineering methodologies
to end users?
4
Cambridge
What answers are
being worked on?
EUSES Consortium Research
Cambridge
Sources & meta-sources
of faults by end users
Types via
informal annotations
Software Engineering
and Languages
Education
Incremental analyses
for immediate communication
HCI and
Psychology
If we build it,
will they come?
6
Outreach & Building Community
Cambridge
K-12 education: quality control mindset
•Research
in curriculum change
•Mathematics education conferences, book
•K-12 teachers
•K-12 students (Saturday Academy)
•High school researchers
Building research community
•Joint
efforts with EU group
•Community-building events in the works:
Workshops, SIGs, BOFs, Dagstuhl
7
Some examples
Cambridge
WYSIWYT & Fault localization for end users
(with Gregg Rothermel, Curt Cook, Joey
Ruthruff).
Surprise-Explain-Reward (with Curt Cook,
many students).
Assertions for end users (Rogan Creswick).
8
WYSIWYT and Fault Localization
Cambridge
What if user sees a “good” value?
• User
can “check off” the value with a √.
• Increases coverage,
according to an
adequacy criterion.
What if a “bad” value?
• User
can “X out”.
• Highlights cells that may
be at fault.
9
Surprise-Explain-Reward:
Enticing Users
Cambridge
The computer’s testing caused it to wonder if this would be a
good guard. Fix the guard to protect against bad values, by
typing a range or double-clicking.
(Introduced at CHI’03).
10
Assertions
User
assertion
Cambridge
Assertion
conflict
Value
violation
System
assertion
11
Cambridge
Now, revisiting those questions...
(Brainstorming)
Questions
Cambridge
1.
Can we “fix the system” to automatically
prevent/detect (some) errors?
2.
Can we “fix the system” to work together
better with users in finding/fixing errors?
3.
Can we “fix the user” to make them care
more about errors?
4.
Can we “fix the user” so that they get
better at avoiding errors?
5.
Can we enforce fixes to the user?
13
Questions (cont.)
Cambridge
<fill in here>
14
And answers (at a level of
fundamentals, to extent possible)
Cambridge
A potentially very positive thing: to continue the dialog
among EUSPRIG, EUSES, and other groups who are
interested.
EUSPRIG is tentatively July 7-8 next year. Some
cooperation with PPIG?
Big database of thousands of European end users who
are using spreadsheets. So, there’s a set of people he
can call up to ask about some of our issues.
Possibility of a survey within some company as a way to
get data about spreadsheet usage. (Types of errors?
Application area?) Publishable! And, informs the design!
Maybe a company would fund the subjects’ incentive if
the people we were surveying were their users. (Steve
had some specific ones in mind.) Possible follow-up by
Susan and Steve.
15
People: we need to hear and talk about actual individual
Descargar

Document