ECTEL 2023: Review criteria

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

For all reviews, the following holds true:

The review should first serve as constructive feedback to the authors. Authors have typically invested a lot of time and energy in this paper and deserve a respectful, constructive reply. Reviewing is part of the ongoing scientific discourse in the sense that researchers engage with each others’ works.  Secondly, the review should be informative to the program chairs, who will ultimately need to decide on paper acceptance.

All papers need to be correctly formatted and have the correct length. If they are not, they may be rejected without further review.

Contributions should fulfil the length requirement (8-15 pages) and use the LNCS Springer Conference Proceedings template.

Criteria

• Relevance to the conference topics and appropriateness of keywords

• Relevant and significant contribution to the field / novelty

• Sufficient theoretical grounding

• Well-positioned in respect to the state of the art

• Suitable methodology

• Claims supported by (empirical) results

• Outlined implications for research and practice

• Quality of writing/clarity of presentation

Overall evaluation (reject, weak reject, neutral, weak accept, accept)

Reviewers are expected to provide a rating of each paper according to the above criteria and a justification for their respective ratings in a written comment.

Contributions should fulfil the length requirements (maximum 4-6 pages, including references) and use the LNCS Springer Conference Proceedings template.

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 related to the conference theme.

With respect to both poster and demo papers, reviewers are expected to provide an overall evaluation (reject, weak reject, neutral, weak accept, accept) and a full-text review that justifies their respective ratings in accordance with the following criteria:

• Relevance to the conference theme and related topics
• Quality of writing/clarity of presentation
• Contribution to the field/novelty
• Discussion of next steps (implications for the community regarding the conference theme and other related topics of technology-enhanced learning)

In addition to the aspects listed above, reviewers would also expect the following from poster papers:

• Research question
• State of the art regarding the research question
• Methodology (suitable to the research question)
• Preliminary results – Presentation of outcomes achieved

In addition to the aspects previously listed, reviewers would also expect the following from demo papers:

• State of the art regarding the demo prototype
• Involved stakeholders
• Use case (or a clear description of how the prototype would be used to improve learning and teaching practices)

Workshop proposals will be assessed according to their fit with ECTEL 2023 conference topics, innovativeness, the extent of interaction, overall quality and comprehensiveness of planning (including planned dissemination activities to recruit attendants).

In case of overlapping workshops, organisers may be contacted to clearly differentiate the workshops or to merge them.