The abstract review group consisting of technical committee members will undertake a review of all abstracts and provisionally allocate acceptable ones into a draft program for the Technical Committee Chairman’s consideration. iPosters are a separate category when uploading an abstract. The submitter must choose if he is submitting his abstract either for an oral presentation or an iPoster presentation.
ITEM |
DEADLINE |
Deadline |
24th June 2019 |
Response to Authors |
28th July 2019 |
Technical Program Finalized |
1st August 2019 |
Scoring |
Criteria |
Outline |
| Quality of Content | Introduction/Rationale | Introduction or rationale must provide a clear background to the rest of the abstract and should be reinforced in the conclusion. |
| Objectives | Objectives must outline the content or expectations of either the project (generally appropriate for research, practical case studies and education topics) or the presentation (may be more appropriate for experience-based presentations, workshops or other presentation formats). | |
| Methods/approach | Methods or approach must provide a clear description of the methodology used, and it must be appropriate to the objectives and rationale of the project or presentation. | |
| Results/practice implications | Results or practice implications must indicate clearly the findings of the project/presentation, and they must be consistent with the methodology and objectives. | |
| Conclusions | Conclusions must be consistent with the introduction or rationale and objectives, so that the information is complete. | |
| Educational Value | Interest and appeal to audience | What would be of interest to them? Is the content relevant? Does it bring a perspective that is relevant to current practice? |
| Important contribution to research/practice/theory or knowledge | Does the abstract indicate the possibility of changing current practice? Does it add significantly to the current body of work in this area? | |
| Novel or innovative contribution, relevant to the conference theme | Is the information novel/unique/innovative in some way? Is the approach or methodology new or different from known approaches? Do the results provide support for a new approach or for changing an accepted approach? Are the ideas presented provocative? Does the abstract reflect the theme of the conference? | |
| Quality of Written Abstract | Self-contained | Is the abstract self-contained? It is important to consider grammar and writing style in this section only, and not let poor grammar influence all ratings; some readers rate this section first and rate on first impressions. Try to be objective. Look for judicious use of acronyms, abbreviations, references. |
| Coherent & Readable | Abstract should be clear on first reading; repeated readings for clarity indicates lower readability. The content should be in a logical sequence. Remember that English may not be the first language of many authors. |