This abstract describes ongoing research on human to human interaction between early career Computer Scientists as they explore a complex collaborative concept mapping task performed by a collocated group using a large wall-screen projected display. We have investigated the effects of input configuration and mode of input on human to human computer interaction through the use of gesture based controllers. Application of Bales' Interaction Process Analysis (IPA) [1] supports identity trade offs in choosing from a plethora of available input devices and displays when investigating interaction and knowledge discovery.

This paper demonstrates how sentiment analysis can be used to identify differences in how students and staff perceive the opinions contained in feedback for programming work. The feedback considered in this paper is conceptually different in that it is given in the form of tags that when associated with a fragment of source code can be considered as a sharable learning resource. The research presented investigates the differences in perception of whether feedback is positive, negative or neutral according to students and examiners. This paper also investigates the adequacy of an automated sentiment analysis engine with a view that sentiment information when combined with the feedback tag and source code may create a more informative sharable learning resource. This paper describes the investigatory technique and presents the initial results. Results indicate that there are important differences between the sentiment of feedback perceived by students and examiners. This paper highlights the benefit of including sentiment data along with feedback.

In order to characterize and improve software architecture visualization practice, the paper derives and constructs a qualitative framework, with seven key areas and 31 features, for the assessment of software architecture visualization tools. The framework is derived by the application of the Goal Question Metric paradigm to information obtained from a literature survey and addresses a number of stakeholder issues. The evaluation is performed from multiple stakeholder perspectives and in various architectural contexts. Stakeholders can apply the framework to determine if a particular software architecture visualization tool is appropriate to a given task. The framework is applied in the evaluation of a collection of six software architecture visualization tools. The framework may also be used as a design template for a comprehensive software architecture visualization tool.