INTRODUCTION

Examining Faculty

Denis Gracanin (chair)

Aisling Kelliher

Deborah Tatar

Exam Topic

Based on the provided literature and additional papers you've read, write a position paper that discusses the issue of embodied interaction and co-located collaboration in mixed-reality environments where the real world is annotated by information that provides additional context and affordance. More specifically:

• Analyze the prospect for compelling use of a system in this area.

• Discuss related examples and theory.

Submit your written answer in the format of the ACM CHI conference paper (10 pages). See https://chi2016.acm.org/wp/guide-to-submission-formats/ for more info.

Reading List

Dourish, P. (2004). Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. MIT press.

Harrison, S. and Tatar, D. (2008). Places: People, events, loci — the relation of semantic frames in the construction of place. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 17(2–3):97–133.

Kirsh, D. (2013). Embodied cognition and the magical future of interaction design. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 20(1):3:1–3:30..

Klemmer, SR., Hartmann, B., Takayama, L. (2006). How bodies matter: five themes for interaction design. In Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS 06). ACM Press: 140-149.

Quarles, J., andIra Fischler, S. L., Fishwick, P., and Lok, B. (2008). Collocated AAR: Augmenting after action review with mixed reality. In Proceedings of the 7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR 2008), pages 107–116.

Rogers, Y. (2004). New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 38(1):87–143.

Suchman, L. (2006) Human-Machine Reconfigurations, Cambridge University Press.

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4):625–636.

Early Withdrawal Policy

Once students have notified the HCI qualifier chair of their intention to take the HCI Ph.D. Qualifier Exam, they may withdrawal from taking the exam at any point prior to the public release of the exam questions. Once the exam questions are released, the exam is considered "in progress" and withdrawal is prohibited. Students with questions about this policy should contact the exam chair directly.

Academic Integrity

Discussions among students of the papers identified for the HCI's Qualifier are reasonable up until the date the exam is released publicly. Once the exam questions are released, we expect all such discussions will cease as students are required to conduct their own work entirely to answer the qualifier questions. This examination is conducted under the University's Graduate Honor System Code. Students are encouraged to draw from other papers than those listed in the exam to the extent that this strengthens their arguments. However, the answers submitted must represent the sole and complete work of the student submitting the answers. Material substantially derived from other works, whether published in print or found on the web, must be explicitly and fully cited. For more information on proper citation of sources, we strongly recommend that you study the guidelines and examples provided by the Graduate Honor System. Note that your grade will be more strongly influenced by arguments you make rather than arguments you quote or cite.

Assessment

After the written exam period, each answer will be graded by the committee members. The score is either 0, 1, 2, or 3 points. The assessment criteria, as defined by GPC, are as follows:

3: Excellent performance, beyond that normally expected or required for a PhD student.

2: Performance appropriate for PhD-level work. Prime factors for assessment include being able to distinguish good work from poor work, and explain why; being able to synthesize the body of work into an assessment of the state-of-the-art on a problem (as indicated by the collection of papers); being able to identify open problems and suggest future work.

1: While the student adequately understands the content of the work, the student is deficient in one or more of the factors listed for assessment under score value of 2. A score of 1 is the minimum necessary for an MS-level pass.

0: Student's performance is such that the committee considers the student unable to do PhD-level work in Computer Science.

Important Dates

4 December 2015 (Friday): Reading list available.

9 December 2015 (Wednesday, last day of classes): Students must commit to take exam and register with the exam chair.

January 2016: Written examination questions released.

31 January 2016: Written examination answers due.

Early February 2015: Oral examination (if needed).

12 February 2016: (Friday) Exam results due to GPC.