OzCHI24 2014 ended…a while ago

It has just been brought to my attention the automated ‘Another OzCHI24 Complete’ post did in fact not post! Indeed it seems to have disappeared all together…

So just as a quick update, we’re now hard at work reviewing all the submissions and hope to get them back to you all soon. When one of us get’s a moment we’ll rewrite the missing post, but in the mean time, well done everyone!

Papers, templates and too many authors?

A couple of teams have asked that since the template only has provision for two authors, how should they format their paper to deal with 3–5 team members. Have a look at this student paper from last year. The text box was reduced to having just one cell, and then a common information such as the University and email domain was grouped. The one change we should have suggested the team make was to include a little bit more information about the University (such as its address and country).

How to submit in 2014!

Remember to keep your blog up to date with all the juicy details of your OzCHI adventure. Anything you can’t fit in the paper but think is important should be posted on your blog. When the review panel needs clarification on your paper or video they will look in your blog, so remember to use references where applicable.

For the paper follow this year’s paper writing guide found here. As you are writing your paper (making sure to use the OzCHI paper template), you should upload it to Easychair. If you don’t have an Easychair account, you can sign up by registering a new account. We strongly recommend that you create your EasyChair accounts now!

You may submit multiple versions of your paper (and it’s probably a good idea in case something goes wrong). If you have multiple versions on EasyChair the last submitted paper is the version that will be reviewed.

Here is a a step-by-step guide for successfully submitting your paper:

  1. Once you are logged in, click on ‘New Submission’ in the menu bar.
  2. Check to make sure you are in the ‘(OzCHI24 Student Design Competition)’ track
  3. Fill in first name, last name, email address, country, and organisation (your university) for each of the members in your team.
  4. Tick the ‘corresponding author’ box for the member in your team that will handle all the correspondence for your team; we will send out the feedback and results from the judging process to this author.
  5. Enter the title and abstract for your paper – these should be the same as in your actual paper (if necessary you can update this later)
  6. Enter at least three keywords (one per line) that describe your submission, for example the keywords might be: email, communication, task management. (if necessary you can update this later)
  7. Upload your paper (ideally as PDF) by clicking on the ‘Choose file’ button.
  8. Click the ‘Submit’ button at the very end of the page and wait for the upload process to be completed.

When you need to submit a new version of your paper, in EasyChair click on your ‘Submission #’ on the title bar, which will take you into a details page for your submission. Then to upload the new version, click the ‘Upload a new version’ link in the menu on the top right corner. From the same menu on the submission details page, you can also update your author information and paper details (title and abstract and keywords).

Remember to include a link to your blog and video in your references. It’s through your references that the review panel will be able to check your final video, so make sure you’ve uploaded the video and gotten it’s URL early enough to include it as a reference!

Email or Tweet us should you have any issues!

Second Mini-Challenge Results

Oh my,

I was having a relaxing evening in my drawing room when I get a call, I was needed to judge the videos for the second mini challenge and what a challenge it was. I immediately finished my scotch and got right to work.

Despite a great number of astounding entries the winner was the brilliant, and just a little scary, Sons of Ive for their tribute to the one and only Hoff!

I must say the competition was fierce and I have to give two honorary mentions, one to Team Kingsloths in Space for their brilliant editing, and to Team Pentagon for their fantastic use of camera and screen.

The other excellent entries are:

Truly mind-bogglingly great work. For this challenge I kindly extended my flippers out to the late teams, but for the final submission you won’t be so lucky. Make sure you leave time for editing, voice-over, compression and upload!

Good luck with the rest of the challenge

His Most splendiferous Dolphin Dolphin, Third of His Name.
Admiral of The Fleet, Grand Duke of the Waves, Knight Commander of the Order of the Sloth.

Paper writing guide 2014 edition

This year we’re once again using an academic format. This has many benefits such as:

  • Standardising referencing, which makes it easier for your reviewers to follow your justifications for your solution, and thus understand your submission
  • Standardising the format, which helps us compare and review all the submissions (so hopefully we will be proportionally quicker)
  • Gives you experience writing in academic style that will be assessed in a peer-review structure
  • Allows you to attach images, tables, and other media to your paper to help strengthen your arguments
  • Simplifies turning the top team entries into a publication format, which we will then publish as part of the OzCHI conference catalogue

The format for your paper is a 2-page ‘mini paper’, using the OzCHI paper template. In this template, once you discount the title box, author list, abstract, references and figures (such as images), you only need to write about one page of content (which in turn is on a page with large margins).

Things you should do

Use references! References provide grounding to the real world and show that your solution isn’t just based on assumptions. For example, you could use the scienceworldreport.com found on the challenge brief page to justify printed foods’ capability to provide real nutrition.

It is a good idea to start working on your paper early. Don’t leave it to the last hour! You can fill in content as you go along using the structure below.

How to structure your paper

The structure of your paper might look something like this:
Title
Make sure your title is not too generic, for example don’t make it simply “Printing Food”. If your solution is a specific application with a name, it’s a good idea to include the name in the title and then specify what it does.
Abstract
Write a short (about 100 to 150 words) abstract that summarises the problem, why it matters and your solution (how you propose to address the problem) as well as the approach you took (e.g. if and how you evaluated your proposed solution).
Author keywords
Enter at least three keywords that describe your submission, for example the keywords might be: food, printing, nutrition.
Introduction
Briefly introduce the challenge problem (you can repeat some of the key messages from the challenge brief), including any additional background research you might have done (most of your references will go here) and your proposed solution (briefly).
Method
Outline your method/approach to the challenge. Try to have at least one reference justifying the approach you took.
Discussion
This will be the bulk of your text. Talk about your solution, why it will be effective, how people will use it, etc. Any results from usability/prototype testing goes here.
Conclusion
Summarise the key findings you made through designing your solution and discuss what work needs to be done to follow on from your solution.
References
List your references using Harvard Referencing (APA). Remember to include both your blog’s and your submitted video’s URLs as references.

Examples

It’s a good idea to look at examples of how other papers are written. In particular we recommend you to take a look at some of the OzCHI student design challenge papers from previous years, like this, this and this. (You need to be within a university network to access the PDF versions of those papers, assuming your university has a subscription for the ACM Digital Library.)

Mini-challenge 2: Music Video

Every year teams underestimate how long their video submission will take to create and then upload.

So for your second challenge, you’re going to have some fun while exploring the magical world of video editing! Your team needs to make a 30–60 second music video. It can be any music style you like, so long as your team is part of the performance.

The video can be as simple or as complex as you wish, but since this is practice for your submission (and thus a chance to see what can go wrong) here are some things you may want to play with:

  • voice overs and/or multiple audio tracks
  • transitions
  • text
  • embedding images with video
  • render quality and times
  • uploading
  • having fun 😉

Your video submissions will be due at 2230 (10.30 p.m.) AEST. You can either embed the videos on your blog, or just provide a link to where it’s hosted (our preference is youtube).

First Mini-Challenge Results

So the first mini-challenge has ended, the judges have mashed flippers together and we have a winner.

11 teams crafted an response to our questions and the answers are (in arbitrary order):

  • Design’ee’rs – http://designeersozchi24.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mini-challenge-1-answers/
  • Innovata – http://innovatafive.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mission-2-mini-challenge-it-is/
  • Kingsloths in Space – http://kingslothsinspace.tumblr.com/post/97944677699/mini-challenge-1-submission
  • The Ninjas – http://theninjas.github.io/blog/designchallengeone.html
  • S.M.A.C.K. – http://smackozchi.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mini-challenge-1-expert-questions/
  • Sons of Ive – http://sonsofive.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/0640-mini-challenge-1/
  • Team Mangalyaan – http://teammangalyaan.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/8/
  • The Pentagon – http://thepentagonozchi24.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mini-challenge-1/
  • The Whimsicals – http://thewhimsicals.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mini-challenge-1/
  • PENTACORE – http://pentacoreozchi24.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/in-response-to-problem-statement-of-mini-challenge-1/
  • Nomadic Tom – http://nomadictom.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/thinking-about-paul-dourishs-questions/
  • Yellow Rubber Duck – https://medium.com/@yellowrubberduck/the-first-mini-challenege-ozchi-2014-986107bdcfbe
  • Floyd Five – http://floyd5chi.wordpress.com/2014/09/20/mini-challenge-1-expert-questions/

It was a close race, but our winners are Team Mangalyaan!

To the teams who didn’t submit an answer for this challenge, we are looking forward to seeing you in the next mini-challenge.

Some general advice from the judges:

  • We’d love to see some more feistiness, this is a design challenge, but you can still have fun and throw out some crazy and controversial ideas.
  • A lot of the answers were discussions on the questions, but either skimmed over answering them, or looked in depth at only a single view point—rather than multiple—for a discussion…keep your minds open!
  • We suggest you all look a little into convergent and divergent thinking, http://v2.centralstory.com/about/squiggle/ is a good place to start.

Good luck with the next mini-challenge and we can’t wait to see what you all come up with next!

Mini-challenge 1: Expert Questions

This year two experts have agreed to pose some questions to get you in the right frame of mind for OzCHI24.

Paul Dourish

Paul Dourish is a Professor of Informatics in the Donald Bren School of Information and Computer Sciences at UC Irvine, with courtesy appointments in Computer Science and Anthropology. His research focuses primarily on understanding information technology as a site of social and cultural production; his work combines topics in human-computer interaction, ubiquitous computing, and science and technology studies. He has published over 100 scholarly articles, and was elected to the CHI Academy in 2008 in recognition of his contributions to Human-Computer Interaction. He is the author of two books: “Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction” (MIT Press, 2001), which explores how phenomenological accounts of action can provide an alternative to traditional cognitive analysis for understanding the embodied experience of interactive and computational systems; and, with Genevieve Bell, “Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing” (MIT Press, 2011), which examines the social and cultural aspects of the ubiquitous computing research program.

Q1. How should we take into account the impacts of technology on people who aren’t users of it at the time? That might mean users at times when they’re not using what we build, or other people who’re never users of the technology. Should other ways of relating to technology be part of design thinking?

Q2. Does technology change quickly or slowly in relation to the experiences or people that you’re designing for? And what might the consequences be of those differences?

Tuck Leong

Dr Tuck Leong is a Human-Computer Interaction(HCI) and Interaction Design Researcher who specialises in human-centred approaches of inquiry and technology design. He has published widely in topics that contribute to Experience-Centred Design, Participatory Design, and Interaction Design. He is also the co-director of the Interaction Design and Human Practice Lab at UTS.

Q3. If the vision of the Internet of Things become a lived reality, then things, people, environment, infrastructure and a whole lot of stuff can potentially communicate, collaborate, and actuate (do things). How might such a reality affect our understanding of food?

Submission

Write a public entry on your team blog with your response to this challenge. Please send us the link either via Twitter, email or post it in the comments section of this news entry. Submissions close at 1600hours (4 p.m.) AEST.