• Reviewing Conference Materials
Summer 2014
Moving Beyond the Guidelines: Some Advice on Reviewing Tips from Dr. Thu Sương Thị Nguyễn, Conference Proposals Indiana University - IUPUI
UCEA provides some guidance regarding what reviewers look for in evaluating proposals (papers, symposia, etc.) submitted for its annual conference (http://ucea.org/conference-summit-submission/). These include: (a) Relevance of research problem, policy or topic to the convention theme and/or broader discourse in the field regarding leadership preparation; (b) Thoroughness and clarity of the proposal; and (c) Theoretical framework, methods, analysis, and presentation of findings (for empirical research). What do these guidelines really tell us? In what follows, I provide some personal thought and elaboration. How should someone approach a review of a conference proposal? The approach can vary a good deal. In general, it is helpful to briefly read through the proposal as a whole to assess the overall aim and determine if the major elements are included. Following this, the reviewer may focus attention on each of the major sections determining if each is developed sufficiently, if the elements cohere and noting strengths and areas of concern.
Understanding the audience is also important and the reviewer evaluation form will ask for ratings on audience appeal. As a major vehicle for research dissemination, audience appeal should be read broadly given the nature of knowledge production conducted through institutions of higher education. The idea is not to screen out those proposals that would draw a smaller audience, but rather to help conference planners make efficient use of conference space.
One thing that should always be true is that the merits of a proposal ought to be assessed based on the quality of the study in its own right. That is, theoretic, methodologic, and interpretative decisions are grounded in different ways of knowing. Thus, our own way of knowing may not always coincide with those of others. This should not be the basis for inclusion/exclusion, rather the merits of the study based on appropriate quality criteria should inform these decisions.
; Reviewing Conference Proposals
Summer 2014
Relevance to convention theme and leadership preparation. Each year, the conference planning committee puts forth an overarching conference theme to help bring overall coherence to the meeting. To organize an event of this size that draws from domestic and international institutions of higher education, such coherence is important. Relevance, however, can be interpreted widely. From the perspective of a scholar working on issues of import to small vulnerable communities, I tend to treat relevance and “leadership preparation” in broader terms. This allows for a couple of things. First, a broader read of relevance tends to capture a wider array of voices that may contribute to the diversity of perspectives represented. Second, such diversity of perspective has great potential for inculcating generative spaces of dialogue – an important aspect of this form of knowledge dissemination.
Thoroughness and Clarity While a 1500 word limit may not appear to be sufficient space for an elaborated proposal; economy of words often helps with clarity of message and thoroughness is not necessarily directly related to number of words. In terms of thoroughness, major questions one might consider are: ü Has the author provided sufficient background/introductory information for the reader to understand the context of the study? ü Has the author grounded the work in the relevant substantive literature, that is, the specific literature related to the topic at hand? ü Has the author provided the reader with enough information to understand the theoretical framework or model underpinning the study? ü Has the author adequately described the methodology? Where appropriate, has the author described his/her positionality? Has the author addressed measures of quality including validity and reliability (where appropriate) and trustworthiness, dependability, credibility, etc? ü Has the author provided a discussion of findings and their interpretations? ü Does the overall study “hang together,” that is, is the proposal internally consistent epistemologically and methodologically? ü In what ways does the study/proposal contribute to the field and to the knowledge base? 3
; Reviewing Conference Proposals
Summer 2014
Is reviewing a conference proposal different than reviewing a manuscript? In general, reviewing journal manuscripts is not wholly different from reviewing conference proposals. The elements one hopes to see in each are broadly the same. However, proposals often summarize studies forcing the author to abbreviate description of the study. Thus, reviewers are forced to assess the potential that cannot be fully elaborated within the space provided. In contrast, manuscripts are far lengthier and represent complete studies. In addition, the aims and scopes of journals are more specified than one generally sees in calls for conference proposals. Other considerations for graduate students? This is a great opportunity to learn and grow in multiple ways. In reviewing proposals, we are exposed to the variety of studies in the field and how others articulate and position their studies. It is always helpful to our own writing to read how others present their ideas, and particularly, when forced to do so very succinctly. Reviewing proposals also presents opportunity to serve the profession and practice doing so in a professional manner. Reviewing peers is held in the highest regard in the academic arena. This scholarly service and responsibility is one that ensures the quality and rigor of work in the field. What if I get assigned a proposal out of my field or area of Sed et tellus at quam sagittiscompletely pharetra. Donec faucibus sagittis justo. expertise? This is not unlikely given the broad nature of the field. Take this as an opportunity to study up and to think about the logic of the study in its own right as noted above. This strengthens the field by encouraging conversations across areas of expertise and developing appreciation of different ways of knowing. This also helps the field to grow without becoming balkanized. That being said, if the proposal is completely outside your area of expertise, it is important to acknowledge the limits of your own knowledge while reviewing based on your understanding and the adequacy of the elements noted above. Signaling that the review is informed but not necessarily expert also helps the conference planners in weighting proposal evaluations relative to one another.
2
Reviewing Conference Proposals
ý
Summer 2014
What NOT to do! See above with regard to judging proposals.
ý
Don’t leave reviews to the last minute. This limits your own ability to fully appreciate what is offered in proposals and the quality of feedback you are able to provide.
ý
Don’t use the process as an opportunity to press individual scholarly and personal agendas.
ý
Don’t be unkind. Proposals typically represent the best efforts of those in the field who are at various stages in their careers. Be generous in choice of words and offering recommendations noting potential for contributions.
Author Background: Thu Sương Thị Nguyễn Thu Sương Thị Nguyễn is an Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Indiana University Purdue University – Indianapolis. She is the daughter of former refugees from Việt Nam. Nguyễn’s scholarship focuses on the treatment of difference and the placemaking practices of vulnerable populations in and around school settings. Her current work centers on the intersection of diaspora, placemaking, cultural politics and school governance. Presently she conducts community-‐engaged research with Vietnamese and Burmese communities in the United States. She is the principal investigator for the Burmese Community Center for Education’s Community Self-‐Empowerment Program and Co-‐Principal Investigator for the Great Lakes Equity Center. Her work is published in Educational Policy, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, the International Journal of Leadership in Education, the International Journal of Urban Education Leadership, and the Handbook of Research on Educational Leadership for Diversity and Equity.
Find resources including info on Mentoring Job Search Writing a proposal on the Graduate Student Page on the UCEA Website.
ucea.org/ graduatestudent-home/
