1. Independent Research End User Design Cortney Germain Matthew Hung Mark Lewis Prazen

2. Motivation End of 2005, 55 million end user developers versus 2.75 million developers (BLS). Wide chasm between the purist view of EUD and the reality in the work world More robust software product that better reflects the knowledge of the domain expert without translation overhead More efficiencies in the software lifecycle Conversely, less discourse; a problem??

3. Questions that Arise Where does this end? Do end users assume full control … are professional developers relegated to techie development and maintenance tasks? Do real roles not change at all? Do we just change the titles and reallocate territory? What is the migration path to true EUD? Is there one? Will we ever reach a purist state? What are the implications for needed future skill sets?

4. Definition of End User Design A design process that compensates for the discrepancy between a user’s expertise and the task to be performed Typically involves a tool or set of tools tailored to the user’s problem domain and system knowledge expertise

5. Reducing Expertise Tension System Knowledge Low Hi Domain KnowledgeHi IT Expert Domain Expert Metaphors Intelligent Systems Easy Dev Tools Hi Level Semantics Simplified Software Development Environ- ments Replacement Domain Models Domain Specific

6. EUD in Software History 1980s:4th generation languages Parameterization – notably in ERP environments Web page design –Characteristics - very domain specific Tools –Successes Myriad of factors: Motivation of users, need to adapt (no back out strategy), targeted tools –Failures Typically general purpose (not measured for the balance of systems & domain knowledge); no motivated users; try to address to many domains or a general user population

7. Current EUD Products Agent Sheet FireFox My Google Wikipedia

8. Open Source v.s. Proprietary Proprietary –software developed by a programmer who is being paid to do so –copyright laws-can't add to it/copy it Advantages: –programmers are being paid –users can't be malicious –no use for a moderator –no issues with trust Disadvantages: –no sharing or adding of ideas (curbs creativity) –no educational value –no creative aspects

9. Open Source v.s. Proprietary Open Source –provides source code so users can download/buy program and make changes –Firefox, Wikipedia, Mozilla Advantages: –share wealth of information freely –creates a better learning environment; more information is always being added –allows for creativity/expression Disadvantages: –trust issues –malicious behavior –not paid- done for enjoyment –Where do you draw the line as to whether a post is credible or not- moderator?

10. Wikipedia How is trust established in such environments? –Trust must be built over time –If you understand how the system works, you can build trust that way –Program Slash Dot has a moderator so users know that it is trustworthy to some extent –There is a common misconception that because a program is open source, it is not trustworthy –Just because programmers are being paid to develop proprietary sources, this means that they are trustworthy?

11. Wikipedia What moves people to participate? –Users feel a sense of community in sharing knowledge with others- people want to be part of something Why do people want to contribute it? –Enjoyment of building a community of knowledge –Users want to have a voice –Build credibility –If you know something relevant, why not share it?

12. Challenges of Implementing the EUD Concept Overview Social Challenges – Changing Roles – Job Security – Social Capital/Incentives tied to Motivation Technical Challenges –Easier Progmg Languages (Flexible Vs Complex) –Quality / Maintainable Software –Control vs Design Freedom

13. Some Responses to the Challenge The Natural Programming Project at CMU - applying CHI principles to the design of programming languages End-User Software Engineering project at OSU - improve the reliability of software produced by end-user programmers Penn State researchers in the Informal Learning in Software Development project - minimalist training materials and reusable code to serve as scaffolding

14. The Future Possible Directions for EUD – Contextual Interface – Quality/Security issue – Motivate end users with ease-to-use and not more functionality – Hybrid system: Visualized framework and a formal language Implications for Future Research –Universal personal tools

15. Project of Design Group Motivation –Apply knowledge from our research about End User Design into the “project builder” used in the L3D lab. Approach –Apply tools with built-in rules and sequences to guide the user’s task or interaction flow and compensate for a lack of system knowledge.

16. Project of Design Group The project builder -http://l3d.cs.colorado.edu/~haleden/example2.html

17. Issues Provide user guidance: error prevention Design by examples: show what can be done, how to be done Provide reflection area during the design process; stable intermediate forms –Let the user see the screen layout result while they are building the simulation environment

18. Challenges Mapping the goal of the user Determining a feedback/critiquing mechanism that is appropriate Learning the patterns of users Mastering the user domain in a short time period