Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Beyond ProgrammingTo A New Era of Design$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Bruce I. Blum

Print publication date: 1996

Print ISBN-13: 9780195091601

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2020

DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780195091601.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (oxford.universitypressscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2021. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 16 October 2021

A Case Study

A Case Study

12 (p.340) A Case Study
Beyond Programming

Bruce I. Blum

Oxford University Press

The purpose of this chapter is to evaluate TEDIUM. Evaluation is similar to correctness in that both are always with respect to some external criteria. what criteria should be used for evaluating an environment that develops and maintains software applications using a new paradigm? Clearly, the criteria of the old paradigm (e.g., lines of code, measures of complexity, effort distributed among phases) are irrelevant. In the early days of medical computing, Barnett playfully suggested the following three criteria for evaluating automated medical systems: . . . will people use it? will people pay for it? will people steal it? . . . At the time, the answers to first two questions frequently were negative, and Barnett’s pragmatic approach was intended to prod the field from theory to practice. TEDIUM is used and paid for, but its techniques have not been transported to other environments (i.e., it has not yet been stolen). I console myself by observing that a lack of recognition need not imply an absence of value. The transfer of ideas often is a product of the marketplace, where acceptance depends more on perception than on quantification. As we have seen throughout this book, there can be vast differences between what we care about and what is measurable. Real projects tend to be large, difficult to structure for comparative studies, and highly dependent on local conditions. In contrast, toy studies are easy to control and analyze, but they seldom scale up or have much creditability. How then should I evaluate TEDIUM? I have tried a number of strategies. I have analyzed small projects in detail, I have reported on standard problems comparing TEDIUM data with published results, I have presented and interpreted summary data taken from large projects, I have extracted evaluation criteria from other sources, and I have examined how TEDIUM alters the software process. All of this was summed up in TEDIUM and the Software Process (1990a).

Keywords:   Clinical information systems, E-Type programs, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Minimality

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .