-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Call for Proposals #68
Comments
just a note that I will be travelling until 11th of june attending a conference. someone else should step in and finish the call for proposals before it's too late. |
Add: We particularly welcome proposals for sessions that are interactive in nature. Shall we add a note encouraging diversity in selecting speakers for proposed panels? |
Include info (on formats, themes etc) as included in the submission template: (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ApmdZX7wColYij7yaf9W7YAuVsSloEvRTl3sgDlizgw/edit) |
From Force2016 - "Consider having the submission form include more robust description of content and provide more guidance for workshop presenters." |
Also from Force2016 - "A few of the moderators took up too much of the time while the speakers were waiting for Q&A. There were complaints about this. Need to be more clear about the role of moderators." Do we need to include more specifics in the call or not until we respond to proposals that are accepted? |
Something to consider about posters (possibly for demos or even sessions as well) before we send out the call. We just need to make sure people know what we are really hoping to have come in so they know what they are aiming for. From Force2016 - "Just about every poster described addressing a problem with an initiative, a platform, a service, a working group, or a product. There were only a few that were real research or analysis. Perhaps there should be some special recognition and encouragement for research posters. When the call for submissions went out in the fall, we did not have a poster award sponsor and we never advertised that there would be awards or recognition. Therefore, we also never stated any real criterium about what makes a good poster or that they would be evaluated at all. This made it very stressful for the committee to select winners and we don’t have any answer if someone wants to know how the winners were selected. Find out if it is possible to leverage the online voting system that was used in the sessions for attendees to vote for favourite posters. Or create a special category for posters that wish to recognized and put the criteria out there when the call is announced and let the committee evaluate them. Voting for the best poster wasn’t very clear to the attendees, some folks missed the ballots and were unable to cast a vote. Or… just relax about posters and consider accepting all posters on a first come/first serve basis rather than treating them like they are academic submissions. Have a deadline and work with the venue on the appropriate space allocation and have sign-ups that are essentially first come/first serve and don’t worry about the overhead and time of an evaluation committee and awards. Weed out the any completely egregious commercial submissions or ones that are not in scope. We haven’t turned away more than a few in the last few years. And they are quite responsive and willing to tailor their submission." |
Add information on daily themes, so that submissions may be developed with those in mind. |
Draft text for call for proposal now on Google Drive for editing: Everyone to contribute/edit, @Daniel-Mietchen to organize sprint on Mon evening (CET) if still needed. |
Looks good. I added a line about welcoming interactive sessions.
Heather
…On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Bianca Kramer ***@***.***> wrote:
Draft text for call for proposal now on Google Drive for editing:
x
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DDxrUMVBEeTABApn8_EEVrC4NuuIJ-xemKmZdKc7fQI/edit>
Everyone to contribute/edit, @Daniel-Mietchen
<https://github.com/daniel-mietchen> to organize sprint on Mon evening
(CET) if still needed.
Have ready for Copernicus to be put on website by *Tuesday June 13*
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#68 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AXoiF0Gp3-iEwL0EiEn1eHF8ze4omlfBks5sCFP9gaJpZM4NwfpQ>
.
--
Heather Ruland Staines
Director, Partnerships
Hypothes.is
M: 203-400-1716
Skype: heather.staines
|
Submission form is now ready for distribution: Link to admin view (including responses) Link to viewable form for distribution: Short url to viewable form: I asked Stephanie to coordinate this with Copernicus for inclusion on the website. Once that is done, further dissemination can start. related to #88 |
Submission form proposed by program committee has been programmed and today has gone live on the conference website. http://www.force2017.org/abstract_submissions/call_for_abstracts.html |
Text:
FORCE2017: Call for proposals
Theme: Changing the Culture
This year’s theme focuses on changing the culture and building new workflows while increasing the diversity and sharing information globally in accessible and expedited ways. We are looking for your contributions that focus on topics such as visualization of science, humanities, and social science scholarship, transparency in research workflows, and the importance of effective communication both within and beyond academia. FORCE2017 provides a unique forum to connect with hundreds of attendees that includes scholars, researchers, librarians, data managers, grant administrators, funders, publishers, editors, societies and anyone else interested in scholarly communications.
This year we invite submission for workshops, presentations, panels, posters, demos, lightning talks
Submission deadline is ...
related to #50
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: