Contribution Guidelines and Review Criteria
Empirical research papers are expected to present a rigorous collection, analysis and interpretation of empirical data that answer specific research questions. The research can include qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods. Strong empirical research papers have a theoretical framework to support the interpretation of the results and to justify the choice of methodology and analysis approaches used, at a level of detail that would permit the study to be replicated.
Theoretical or philosophical research papers are expected to present a strong thesis with a clear and explicit chain of reasoning. Possible topics can be for example a critical review about a specific didactical (pedagogical) approach, or the assumptions that serve as a rationale or foundation to methods; a reinterpretation of existing results using an alternative framework; a sustained critique of a study or a set of studies. A philosophic paper can also focus on building or synthesizing theory from existing empirical research or borrowing theory or methods from other fields like social sciences, philosophy or pedagogical psychology.
All submissions will be reviewed by the program committee members to ensure the selection of high quality contributions. Therefore, we suggest checking your contribution on the following scientific criteria:
- Contextualization of Contribution within Computing Education
- Contribution to Computing Education
- Research Method and Results (esp. empirical research papers)
- Links to Existing Theory
- Thesis and Chain of Reasoning
- Language and Expression
Does the submission demonstrate knowledge of the discourse in the field the paper is related to?
Does the submission advance the field and makes significant contributions?
Note: The contributions could come in any number of forms, related to the nature of the paper above: contribute theory, contribute methods, challenge "common knowledge", call into question accepted results, etc.
Are the chosen data collection and analysis methodologies well documented and appropriate with regard to research questions?
Is the submission theoretically strong? How is it grounded in existing theory, and what is the quality of linking the paper to a theoretical foundation?
Does the submission have a strong thesis and a clear and explicit chain of reasoning?
Do language and English expressions in the submission reference the international scholarly standard for scientific publications?