Guidelines for submission of abstracts
All presenters must submit an abstract, whether they plan on submitting a full paper or not.
Abstracts will be reviewed to evaluate the suitability of the research for inclusion in the conference programme, and authors will receive qualitative feedback on their abstracts. The first round of abstract reviews evaluates suitability for the conference and provides formative feedback to help authors develop their work into a strong submission.
Selected submissions will be invited to submit a full paper, based on the abstract, which will form part of the conference proceedings. Full papers will be reviewed separately after the initial abstract review process.
Abstracts should be 250-500 words (1-2 pages), and should include enough detail of the research motivation, approach and findings, in order to make an informed decision on the quality and suitability of the research. Abstracts will be reviewed anonymously, so do not include names or affiliations in your abstract.
Where appropriate/applicable to the work, the abstract should include:
- Rationale: background and motivation for the work
- Scope: purpose and significance of contribution
- Methodology: approach to the work, including research design, where appropriate
- Findings: key results and conclusions
The following aspects of the abstracts will be considered by the reviewers:
- How interesting and significant is the research to the engineering education community? Is the need for the research conveyed by the author(s)?
- Is the approach chosen appropriate? If applicable, are the methods clearly explicated? Is there an alignment between the theoretical/conceptual background, methods, and findings?
- How convincing are the findings and conclusions? Can you substantiate your findings?
- How clearly is the research communicated? Is the abstract easy to read and understand?