We all have things about our jobs that are interesting — tips, cool collaborations, workflows, and anecdotes. Most things we do as STEM librarians are applicable to other STEM librarians, even when we may have to work harder to arrive at generalizable lessons — and that work matters in many conference proposals! While not all proposals are accepted, many are, and it’s impossible to build an exciting conference program without casting the net wide to see what people think up. Thank you so much to everyone who has submitted to us and helped to make our conference what it is!
5: The proposal contains highly innovative content and shows originality in its method of presentation.
4: The proposal contains highly innovative content or shows originality in its method of presentation.
3: The proposal builds on or expands existing knowledge/content and/or provides a slightly modified take on typical presentations.
2: The proposal features traditional incrementally built upon content with a standard mode of presentation.
1: The proposal contains unoriginal content and a standard mode of presentation.
0: The proposal does not make clear its content or how it will be presented.
5: The proposal is applicable and/or has impact across all/most disciplines and functional areas and can be put into practice immediately.
4: The proposal is applicable and/or has impact across all/most disciplines or functional areas and can be put into practice quickly.
3: The proposal is applicable and/or has impact across some disciplines or functional areas and may be hard to put into practice immediately.
2: The proposal is applicable and/or has impact to one or two disciplines or functional areas and may be hard to put into practice immediately.
1: The proposal is applicable and/or has impact for one disciplines and functional areas and may be hard to put into practice immediately.
0: The proposal does not make clear if it is at all applicable or impactful.
5: The proposal is relevant across a large number of disciplines and functional areas and the audience of the conference has been considered.
4: The proposal is relevant across a large number of disciplines or functional areas and the audience of the conference has been considered.
3: The proposal is relevant across a small number of disciplines and/or functional areas and the audience of the conference has been considered.
2: The proposal is relevant across one discipline or functional area and the audience of the conference has been considered.
1: The proposal is relevant across one discipline or functional area and the audience of the conference may not have been considered.
0: The proposal is relevant to the presenter only and the audience of the conference has not been considered.
2: All elements of the proposal are included and well clarified.
1: Most of the proposal elements are included, but may not be sufficiently in depth.
0: Most of the elements of the proposal are absent.
2: The proposal is well organized and deeply addresses possible issues.
1: The proposal lacks some organization and/or does not consider some possible issues.
0: The proposal is unorganized and/or does not consider any obvious issues.
2: The proposal should stand up to interactions with a live audience and will keep the conversation flowing.
1: The proposal may have hiccups with a live audience and/or keeping an active conversation.
0: The proposal will not survive a live setting or generate any conversation.
2: There is a good match between the content being proposed and the presentation style proposed.
1: The content of the proposal may benefit from a different session style but should still work with the proposed style.
0: The content in the proposal does not match the style chosen.
If we see that a proposal scores highly in other categories, but it doesn’t match its proposed session type, we may accept something as another type of presentation.
2: The proposal indicates the presenter is familiar with the content and the existing conversation behind it.
1: The proposal indicates the presenter has some familiarity with the content but seems to be unfamiliar with some of the conversation behind it.
0: The proposal indicates the presenter is not familiar with the ongoing conversation behind the content they are proposing.
2: You are super excited for this proposal and would shift your schedule around to see it.
1: You want to see this proposal but if you had a conflict you would not shift your day around.
0: You would not attend the proposed session.
Helps presentations that are close to the “no” cutoff stand out if we see keen interest in them during proposal review.