SIGCSE 2018 Review Process for Panel Proposals

Panel sessions provide an opportunity for expert panel members to present their views on a specific topic and then to discuss these views among themselves and with the audience. Usually a panel session starts with a brief introduction of the panel topic and the participants, followed by short presentations by the panelists giving their views. They are scheduled in standard conference spaces. The session must allow sufficient opportunity (about 30 minutes) for an interactive question and answer period involving both the panelists and the audience.

A typical panel will consist of four participants, including the moderator. Limiting a panel to four participants allows sufficient time for audience questions. Proposals with more than four panelists must convincingly show that all panelists will be able to speak, and the audience able to respond, within the session time.

Panel proposal review is NOT blind. Criteria used in reviewing the proposals include the likely level of interest of the topic, the presence of panel members with multiple perspectives on the topic, and the likelihood that the panel will leave sufficient time for audience participation.

If the proposal is accepted, all presenters listed in the panel description will be required to register for the conference and to participate in the session.

SIGCSE panel proposals are reviewed using EasyChair. Authors submit a panel proposal by Sept. 1, 2017. Assigned reviewers submit their anonymous reviews through EasyChair by the review deadline (Sept. 20, 2017), making a recommendation along with a rationale using the conference review form in EasyChair. Each proposal is assigned to at least three reviewers.

Dates for notification of acceptance and camera-ready submission can be found on the detail page for each specific submission type.

For a typical Panel submission, here are some key factors to include (as an author) and to look for (as a reviewer):

1. Topic
   • Is the panel topic clearly stated? Are the take away from the audience clearly indicated?
   • Is the panel Topic of interest to the SIGCSE community?
     • is this a new topic of discussion?
     • is this a continuing topic of discussion for the SIGCSE community?
     • is the panel topic timely and relevant to current trends in CS Education or CS Ed Research?
   • Does the proposal identify discussion questions relevant for exploring the topic and generating an interesting & interactive discussion?
2. Structure & Plan for Audience Participation
   • Is their an overview of the panel structure?
   • Does the proposed structure include time for a brief introduction of the topic and the panelists?
   • Does the proposed structure include time for panelists to present their view?
   • Does the proposed structure allow sufficient time for an interactive question and answer period between the audience and panelists (30 mins)
3. Panel Members
   • Does the proposal clearly identify the panelists (i.e., name and affiliation) and describe their expertise related to the topic?
   • Is the panel composed of panelists that represent multiple/diverse views on the topic?
   • Does the proposal clearly identify no more than 4 panelists, including the moderator?
   • If there are more than 4 panelists, are each of the panelist needed for representing a full range of perspectives on the panel topic?