IWC Abstract Review
In addition to the traditional Abstract Rating System that has been in use, the following alternative Abstract Grading Guidelines are provided for those interested in using. Please note that it is not mandatory to use these guidelines or the traditional Abstract Rating System. It is important to use a consistent method when rating. There is no need to rate every abstract, especially if it is a subject that you do not have an expertise or if it is a conflict of interest. If you are not rating an abstract, then enter ‘abstain’ in the corresponding cell, (as opposed to zero). Remember zero means “worthless.” Entering a “0” will lower the average of that abstract; “abstain” will not have that effect. The grades from all EC members will be averaged to determine the relative ranking of the abstracts.
Topic (maximum of 2 points) – Issues and technologies felt to be of direct and current interest to the IWC audience.
Abstract Contents (maximum of 4 points) – Well-written and meaningful description of proposed paper; new and/or innovative content rather than rehash of prior work; technical rather than commercial presentation; theoretical or applied; new or novel application of existing technology; follow-up to prior IWC presentation (e.g. field demonstration of earlier lab or pilot study).
Author (maximum of 2 points) – Prior track record at IWC or other technical conferences; solicited abstract by EC or AC member; recognition in the industry/area; end-user.
Discretion (maximum of 2 points) – points can be awarded in this area for a number of reasons. Anywhere from an exceptional written abstract or subject to an excellent presenter. This is where the Executive Committee member uses past involvement in the conference to elevate abstracts that they deem to be very worthy of the conference.
Please return grades by Monday, March 23, 2020
IWC Grading Sheet (excel)