Evaluation Criteria: Point of View/Reflection of Experience and Workshops

Evaluation Criteria Poor Fair Good Excellent
Session Objectives and Participant Outcomes The session objectives and participant outcomes are not stated in the proposal. The session objectives and participant outcomes are implied in the proposal. The session objectives are stated and the proposal articulates what participants will know or be able to do as a result of participating in the session. The session objectives and participant outcomes are well articulated in the proposal. It is clear how they will guide the participants’ session selection.
Relevance of Proposal to Conference Theme The proposal is not relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is somewhat relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is for the most part relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is directly aligned to the conference theme.
Contribution to the Conference and/or to the field of Higher Education The topic of the proposal is not current or appropriate to higher education and/or the audience. It is outside the scope of the conference. The topic of the proposal may not be current, but it addresses some important issues in higher education. It may be a session worth attending. The topic of the proposal is current and appropriate to higher education and audience. It is probably a session worth attending. The topic is cutting-edge, relevant and highly significant to higher education. It is definitely a session worth attending or recommending to others.
Informed by Theory, Research, and/or Practice The proposal is vaguely connected to theory, research, and/or practice in higher education. The proposal is somewhat connected to theory, research, and/or practice in higher education. The proposal is well connected to theory, research, and/or practice in higher education. The proposal makes contributions to the development of theory, research, and/or practice in higher education.
Elements of Engagement The proposal includes minimal or no elements of engagement to actively involve participants. The proposal includes some elements of engagement, but the session is for the most part more informative than interactive. The proposal includes several elements of engagement, but could have more variety in terms of the active learning strategies. The session is highly participatory and includes a variety of active learning strategies to engage the participants throughout the session.

Evaluation Criteria: SoTL and Research related presentations/workshops

Evaluation Criteria Poor Fair Good Excellent
Research Questions The research questions are not clearly presented in the proposal. The research questions are implied in the proposal. The research questions are stated and they are anchored in a relevant review of the literature and practice. The research questions are clearly stated and they are well anchored in a relevant review of the literature and practice.
Theoretical Framework No theoretical framework is presented in the proposal. The theoretical framework is implied in the proposal. The theoretical framework is stated and anchored in a relevant review of the literature. The theoretical framework is clearly stated and well anchored in a relevant review of the literature.
Objectives The study objectives do not address an educational needs, problem, or challenge. The study objectives loosely address an educational need, problem, or challenge. The study objectives are stated and the proposal articulates how they address an educational need, problem, or challenge. The study objectives are well articulated in the proposal. It is clear how they address an educational need, problem, or challenge.
Methods, Techniques, Modes of Inquiry The methods, techniques, modes of inquiry are not described. The methods, techniques, modes of inquiry are implied. The methods, techniques, modes of inquiry are clearly described. The methods, techniques, modes of inquiry are clearly described and well executed.
Results and/or substantiated conclusions The results and/or substantiated conclusions are not described. The results and/or substantiated conclusions are ungrounded. The results and/or substantiated conclusions are described. The results and/or substantiated conclusions are described and well grounded.
Relevance of Proposal to Conference Theme The proposal is not relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is somewhat relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is for the most part relevant to the conference theme. The proposal is directly aligned to the conference theme.
Contribution to the Conference and/or to the field of Higher Education The study does not contribute anything new to the field of higher education. It is outside the scope of the conference. The does not contribute anything new, but it addresses some important issues in higher education. It may be a session worth attending. The study contributes to the field of higher education. It is probably a session worth attending. The highly original, relevant and highly contributes to the field of higher education. It is definitely a session worth attending or recommending to others.