Workshop Review Guidelines


Workshops provide an in-depth review of, or introduction to, a topic of interest, and should provide participants with materials and/or ideas that are immediately useful in the classroom. To this end, workshop presenters should provide participants with handouts, online materials, or other tangible documents/ artifacts outlining and/or supporting the workshop material.

Workshop proposals undergo review but not blind review. Proposals are evaluated for relevance, anticipated interest, quality, and availability of appropriate facilities. In addition, feedback on, and attendance at, similar workshops that have been offered in previous years may be taken into account. This is particularly relevant for workshops that propose repeating or extending a previously offered workshop. Authors may want to review the list of workshops accepted in previous years before submitting a proposal.


Please provide constructive feedback and clearly justify your choice of rating to help the authors. A review that gives a low score with no written comments is not helpful to the authors since it simply tells the authors that they have been unsuccessful, with no indication of how or why.

Reviewers will be asked to summarize the work; provide their familiarity with the submission topic; comment on the experience of the workshop leaders, the agenda, and materials; provide feedback on the abstract and advertisement text; identify strengths and weaknesses of the submissions; and provide an overall evaluation. Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the program committee to address concerns about the submission. These comments will not be shared with submitting authors.