Presentation formats - Guidelines

Congress sessions will be organized by the conference themes and subthemes to aid attendees in making informed decisions about which to attend. During the electronic submission process, proposal authors will be asked to identify the theme and subtheme most relevant for their session. 

We also are encouraging student participation at ISCAR 2017. Proposals that include or feature students’ perspectives on these threads are welcomed.

Presentation types

1. Paper: 
A paper submission is an individual paper (one or more co-authors) to be presented in a paper session or a roundtable session.  

2. Poster:
A poster is an individual poster (one or more co-authors) to be presented during a poster session.

3. Symposium:
A symposium examines specific problems from a variety of perspectives. Alternative interpretations and complementary or contrasting points of view are welcomed. A portion of the session may be devoted to activities such as a panel discussion among the presenters and discussants, questions and discussion among all those present at the session, or small-group interaction. Please, identify a chair person. Other innovative formats (e.g., town meetings) can be submitted. 

4. Structured poster session: 
Research presentations in a poster format research are briefly introduced to draw the audience’s attention to these poster presentations and what links them together. Most of the time is devoted to poster visits. Please, identify a chair person and a discussant.

5. Working group roundtable: 
Working group roundtables encourage substantive exchange among researchers working on a common set of research interests, issues or challenges. Please identify a chair person.

The Program Committee reserves the right to allocate a different presentation type for matters of relevance and space. 

Participants submitting proposals before or on October 23rd will be notified by
December 15th 2016

Each proposal will be reviewed by three reviewers. Proposals will be given one of the following ratings: Accept, Accept with minor revisions, or Decline. Where only minor revisions are required, you will have the opportunity to revise and promptly resubmit. The reviewers’ decision will be final.

All proposals must be in accordance with local policies for research involving human subjects.

Considerations for review of proposals

Proposal files to be uploaded are let to the discretion of author(s). Keep in mind, however, that reviewers will be invited, if found relevant to the nature of the proposal, to use the following questions to guide their review of proposals:

  1. Questions and rationale
    What important question(s) related to the conference theme and sub-themes are addressed?
    Do author(s) demonstrate some understanding of the ISCAR existing scholarship in the field, theme/sub-themes?
  2. Theory/Methods/Framework/Models
    Do author(s) identify theories/methods/frameworks/models in use?
  3. Outcomes
    Are findings reported?
    Do author(s) specify how the submitted proposal contribute to the understanding or practice of ISCAR?
  4. Reflective critique
    Do author(s) offer a critical/reflective point of view regarding how their proposal fit into the body of knowledge of the theme/sub-theme being addressed?
  5. Audience engagement (not for posters)
    Are opportunities for active audience engagement specified?


Each proposal will be reviewed by three reviewers.

Want to volunteer to review ?

Please let us know by email, and include your name and institutional affiliation in your correspondence. Please also identify yourself as an experienced or a junior reviewer. (For the purposes of this conference, experienced reviewers are those who have conducted 15 or more reviews of teaching & learning research-related materials in the past 5 years.)

To volunteer to serve as a reviewer or to ask questions about the review process, please contact