Revisions for the final paper were not too complicated. I actually thought this revision was easier than the one for Deliverable 6. The bulk of the work was adding a Computer Science Education subsection to the Background section. I realized that I had not looked at the CS Education papers in several weeks, so I had to go back and review each one. I wish I had written a little summary along the way and somehow saved it with the document. Maybe it would have been helpful to do that in this journal.
The other work for this project was basically getting things organized a little better. Separating the measures and methodology, deciding what went in the background vs. intro, and doing a better job of explicitly stating the role of my paper were all mini-tasks along the way. I also tried to do a better job of explaining that the interface was designed for student use. Oh, and I tried to integrate the remote IDEs into how they applied to Duo. Ok, so maybe I did a little more than I thought.
I feel better about the paper now. As you pointed out, it is a good start to an actual research paper. While I am happy with what I have learned about HCI in this class, I think learning about research skills was just as (if not more) valuable. These are things I will be able to use in other classes, as well as graduate school. I wish we had more classes where these skills were encouraged.