iframe content

Review procedure

All full and concise paper submissions will be subjected to a double blind peer review process involving a panel of external reviewers acting on the behalf of the Program Committee. Reviewers use the criteria outlined below to assign ratings and make recommendations to the Committee on acceptance, conditional acceptance or rejection of submissions. Offers of acceptance specify a publication and presentation format, and include advice on any required or desirable revisions. Additional advice to reviewers, which authors may find helpful to read, is given under [Advice to reviewers]

Category	Description	Weight
Suitability	Relevance to conference theme, sub themes and intended audience.	20%
Quality of research	The paper is original, and clearly identifies broad and insightful implications for theory and/or policy and/or practice.	15%
Literature review	Clearly situated in current literature and/or policy with well articulated conceptual or theoretical framework and related research questions that address a novel issue(s).	15%
Method	Adopts an appropriate research methodology for the purpose of the paper.	15%
Analysis	Insightful critical analysis and interpretation that leads to clear, logical findings, conclusions and implications for theory and/or policy and/or practice.	20%
Writing	Ease of reading, grammar, spelling, format, referencing details.	15%

Owing to the tight turnaround times for the review and notification processes, the Program Committee will not be able to provide detailed formative feedback to authors who are not offered their first preference of publication and presentation formats, or to authors of rejected submissions. Reviewers and the Program Committee will be guided by criteria given in the six categories listed above.

As with previous ascilite conferences, one of the purposes for the review process is to obtain DEEWR (2009) recognition of the work, in the Conference publication category. To this end, the Committee confirms that refereed proposals accepted for ascilite 2009 Conference publication will:

Meet the definition of research in relation to creativity, originality, and increasing humanity's stock of knowledge;
Be selected on the basis of a DEEWR compliant peer review process (independent, qualified expert review; double blind reviews conducted on the full articles, prior to publication);
Be published and presented at a conference having national and international significance as evidenced by registrations and participation;
Be made available widely through the Conference web site (DEEWR, 2009).

Posters, interactive sessions, symposia and workshops are reviewed by the Conference Committee, and are not eligible for DEST/DEEWR recognition, regardless of final published length, owing to the nature of these presentations and the absence of external reviewing.

We offer a general recommendation to authors who in the future may wish to submit a version of their work to a journal. This is, please consider the concise paper and poster categories. We expect that acceptance in these categories will optimise your scope for a subsequent submission of an expanded, later version to a journal. In general, journal editors are likely to be impressed favourably by your disclosure (e.g. in an acknowledgment paragraph) that a preliminary version was accepted at ascilite Auckland 2009. Whilst editorial policies vary considerably, and for definitive advice authors should consult the editors of the journal concerned, in general, publication of a full paper in ascilite Proceedings Auckland 2009 is likely to preclude publication of the same work in a journal.