Review Criteria
Review Criteria - CFP
All submissions will undergo a double-blind peer review process conducted by at least two expert reviewers. Papers must demonstrate high scholarly standards, methodological rigor, theoretical grounding, and a clear contribution to engineering and computing education or accreditation. Each paper will be evaluated using the following criteria on a 5-point scale (5 = Excellent, 1 = Very Poor).
Context: Rate the effectiveness of relating this work in demonstrating a strong knowledge of related and prior work. Rate and include specific suggestions of missing literature.
Significance: Rate and summarize how this submission is important and makes an important contribution to accreditation or engineering education.
Relevance: Rate how and explain how the work advances frontiers in education within the context of ICACIT Symposium.
Scholarly Quality: Rate and summarize how the submission demonstrates appropriate rigor and reflective depth when outlining the novel practice at their and other institutions. A high impact paper in this category is one that develops new and intriguing insights in the context of ongoing research, and/or presents preliminary analysis of empirical data.
Language and Expression: Rate and assess the organization, language and English expression used in the submission.
Papers should demonstrate scholarly quality as evaluated on the strength of the methodology used, the quality/depth of the theoretical foundation, and the quality/depth of the analysis and related discussion. In addition, these should maintain a high level of scholarly quality, reflecting on how this work extends/is distinguished from other work attempted in similar areas.