Reviewing Process and Criteria - EC-TEL 2020

EC-TEL has multiple paper and submissions formats. Below we list the different expectations and review criteria for each category, as well as for the best paper / demo / poster awards.

For all reviews the following holds true:

  • The review should firstly serve as constructive feedback to the authors. Authors have typically invested much time and effort in their papers, and deserve constructive and respectful feedback. Reviewing is part of the ongoing scientific discourse, in the sense that researchers engage with each others’ works.  
  • The review should be informative for the program chairs who ultimately need to decide on papers’ acceptance.
  • The review should consider the contribution in the light of responsible research and innovation (RRI) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This does not mean enforcing the operationalization of respective impact, but respecting RRI and SDG in the research questions, methodologies (e.g., ethical approval and design, participatory methods & stakeholder engagement) and discussing implications for society and quality education, for example,  in this light.

All papers have to adhere to the specified format (including length) for the category they have been submitted. Failure to meet this requirement may result in rejection without further review.

 

Research papers

The contribution should be commensurate with length (8-14 pages LNCS template).

Reviewers are expected to provide an overall evaluation (strong reject, reject, weak reject, neutral/borderline, weak accept, accept, strong accept) and a full-text review that justifies their rating according to the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the conference topics
  • Quality of writing/clarity of presentation
  • Clarity and importance of the research question
  • Substantive review of the state-of-the-art regarding the research question
  • Suitability of the methodology for the research question
  • Contribution to the field/novelty
  • Potential impact/implications of the research

Reviewers are asked to identify within the full review whether they would recommend the paper for a best paper award or not.

 

Poster & demo papers

Paper length is limited to 5 pages (including references)

In general, poster and demo papers adhere to the same criteria and evaluation process as research papers. However, poster and demo papers present research-in-progress and describe innovative TEL applications (e.g., dashboards, tutor systems, interactive learning technologies, etc.). These differences are reflected in the evaluation criteria.

Reviewers are expected to provide an overall evaluation (strong reject, reject, weak reject, neutral/borderline, weak accept, accept, strong accept) and a full-text review that justifies their rating according to the following criteria:

  • Relevance to the conference topics
  • Quality of writing/clarity of presentation
  • Clarity and importance of the research question
  • Substantive review of the state-of-the-art regarding the research question
  • Suitability of the methodology for the research question
  • Contribution to the field/novelty
  • Potential impact/implications of the research

Additionally, posters and demos should follow the LNCS template including the following sections:

  • Pedagogical and Technological background – Research-in-progress must include a TEL contribution considering both technology and learning and a SOTA for both
  • Results and outcomes achieved – Presentation of significant research-in-progress that is clearly positioned in the overall research agenda
  • Outlook – Discussion of next steps on the research agenda (up to the conference) and in the light of RRI

 

Impact papers 

(Long/short paper) - the length should be proportionate to the contribution (6-14 pages).

Reviewers are asked for an overall evaluation (strong reject, reject, weak reject, neutral/borderline, weak accept, accept, strong accept) and are expected to provide a full-text review that justifies their rating and addresses the relevant criteria from the below list:

  • Relevance to the conference topics
  • Quality of writing/clarity of presentation
  • Motivation: Does the submission address a real-world problem or practical use case? 
  • State of the art in practice - what is currently the state of the art in practice?
  • Take-Away Message and Contribution: What does the paper contribute - does it identify a relevant practical problem that would warrant more research? Does it describe a best practice that shall be shared in the community? In what way is the identified problem or practical solution interesting and relevant to practitioners and researchers at EC-TEL?

 

Workshop proposals

Reviewers are asked for an overall evaluation (strong reject, reject, weak reject, neutral/borderline, weak accept, accept, strong accept) and are expected to provide a full-text review that justifies their rating and addresses the relevant criteria from the below list: 

  • Balance, synergy, and relevance to the conference topics
  • Quality of writing/clarity of presentation
  • Expected interest in the workshop topics: potential to advance the state-of-the-art of TEL research and practice
  • Existing community: Is the workshop preceded by previous workshops? Is there some other form of community that is addressed by the workshop proposal?
  • Target audience: Who is the target audience? Does the proposal clearly state how sufficient submissions and participants could be achieved?
  • Format: Is the proposal implementing innovative and interactive formats?
  • Reasonable planning: Is the proposal overall reasonably and well planned? 
  • Publication: [Recommended] Does the proposal include a reasonable plan to make workshop results publicly and persistently available (e.g., workshop proceedings - but other reasonable plans are welcome)?
EC-TEL 2020

Host Organisations

Paedagogische Hochschule HeidelbergHEIDELBERG SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

Supporting Organisations

Open UniversiteitTALLINN UNIVERSITYUniversidad Carlos III de MadridTrinity College DublinTU GrazThe Open UniversityKU LeuvenNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyUniversidad de ValladolidFH Graubündenhttc e.V.

Sponsors:

Springer

Supporters:

European Association On Technology Enhanced Learning

Social Media: