Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

We invite you to consult the Call for Papers which outlines the different types of submission formats and their respective requirements. We also invite you to watch our Submissions Webinar Q&A where members of the Organizing team and Program Chairs discussed the call for papers, types of submissions and answered questions from the audience.

It is the same submission link (https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=isls2024), but you will have to pick a track (CSCL / ICLS / Hybrid Symposia) when you submit the paper. Within Hybrid symposia you will also have to pick CSCL vs ICLS.

Three main features are new in ISLS2024. First is the hybrid symposia track in which born-hybrid symposia can be proposed. Second is the community engagement day (more information to follow). Third is the accommodations process; all participants who need accommodations to be able to participate are encouraged to utilize this process. Please read through the 2024 Hybridity plan to learn more about the Hybrid Symposia track and Accommodations process.

No, unless you withdraw it from the other publication venue.

Yes.

As outlined in the Submission Template:

• Do not include author names and institutions under the title in your submissions.
• Avoid using phrases like “our previous work” when referring to earlier publications by the authors.
• When referring to your own work, use something like “Authors, 2022” instead of your name(s). When referring to your own projects which might have a known or searchable name, change the name of the project.
• Remove information that may identify the authors in the acknowledgements (e.g., grants, colleagues, institutions, federal agencies of your country).
• Avoid providing web links to sites or other supplementary materials that may identify the authors.

Also, when citing your work in the References/Bibliography, do not include the name of the papers. For example, list your work as:

Author (2015).
Author (2018).
Author et al. (2020).

No limit.

The acceptance rate for papers into the refereed proceedings for both ICLS and CSCL is generally 30%. This rate is comparable to acceptance rates at selective computer science conferences (CHI 2019: 24.3%, SIGGRAPH 2019: 28%, 2019 CSCW: 26%, AIED: 25%).

As with any selective process, understanding the evaluation criteria and having models of accepted work are important first steps to increasing one’s chances of acceptance. To this end, we have provided some resources for you to be informed of the evaluation criteria as well as other important considerations when selecting the target conference and the submission type (see Submissions Webinar Q&A). You may also consult previous years’ proceedings which can provide you with examples of previously accepted work.

Information about ISLS proceedings can be found on the ISLS proceedings webpage and on the ISLS Publications page.

ISLS proceedings are peer reviewed, archival publications. In some fields they are considered journal equivalent. For example, you could add them to your CV under a section for “Published peer-reviewed proceedings.” For questions about republishing portions of proceedings papers elsewhere, we invite you to consult the ISLS Publications FAQ for more information.

Yes and this is encouraged! You will need to expand the paper to make it more robust and comprehensive but having the initial version be an ISLS paper is a great way to start and get some feedback from the field on your ideas and your work. If you intend to submit an expanded version to another journal not associated with the society then you will need to ask the Publication Committee to grant you permission. You do not need permission if you are submitting to one of the society’s two journals — JLS or ijCSCL. See more information on the ISLS Publications page.

Your first point of contact for any general questions or inquiries should be [email protected]. This includes visa inquiries, registration questions, housing, and all other conference-related issues. These inquiries will be referred if needed.

For questions related to reasonable accommodations or permission to participate remotely as a reasonable accommodation, email [email protected]; if you wish to request a reasonable accommodation, please submit your request via the form at https://2024.isls.org/isls-2024-reasonable-accommodations-process.

For issues related to the program (e.g., withdrawing your paper, logistical concerns, etc.) your point of contact is the program co-chairs for the track your session is in (ICLS, CSCL, demos, workshops, etc.), UNTIL you are assigned a session chair. At that point, your primary point of contact for program-related issues is your session chair.

For questions related to the volunteers program, email [email protected] – to apply to the volunteer program, fill out the form at https://2024.isls.org/call-for-volunteers.

We anticipate a turnaround time of 3–4 days for most requests, except requests for accommodation which may take longer.

There is no limit (minimum or maximum) for single contributions within a symposium. The total page limit (8 pages for traditional, 8 pages plus 1 describing format and benefits for hybrid) is what counts. Please also keep in mind the 60 minute presentation format.

The name of the discussant for symposia is sufficient. No other materials are required. Discussants should not be identified for single paper or poster submissions.

Yes, an introductory section highlighting the overarching aims and scientific/educational relevance of the symposium is required. Any introductory sections are included in the 8-page limit.

Yes.

Yes. There are no constraints on who or where the papers come from for symposia.

Structured or interactive poster sessions should be submitted as a symposium, just please outline the format of your session within your proposal.

Yes. There is technically no limit to the number but please keep in mind the 60 minute time limit of the overall session time.

Posters are evaluated using the same criteria as “research papers” (see Q&A above), except with some leeway for scholarly rigor, given that posters usually present work in its early stages. Instead, posters will be evaluated based on their potential to generate feedback from the ISLS community.

In general, theoretical contributions are evaluated in terms of multiple criteria: a) the theoretical contribution addresses a meaningful need in the field, that it is, it contributes to a problem or issue that the field of the Learning Sciences (LS) has been grappling with; b) it provides a substantial contribution, it is novel and offers new insights that are powerful for thinking about learning in real world contexts (e.g., formal and informal learning spaces); c) it builds on and connects to existing work in the LS field—the work needs to fit in and contribute to ongoing conversations in the LS field and so you need to explicate, in the paper, how the new theory builds on and connects to prior work in the LS field.

Posters are usually works in progress and often may not have empirical data. It is acceptable to submit a poster proposal without data.

Posters aim to provide authors with feedback and conversation during early stages of research, for example, during design or very early in the implementation phase. Short papers aim to help authors further refine work that has already begun and is perhaps nearing completion.

All sections matter and the key is balance. Usually for an 8 page submission you want to have about 2 pages for introduction and theoretical frameworks, then about 0.5-1 page methods (closer to 1 page if you are describing an instructional design as well as how you studied it), then 3-4 pages for results, about 0.5-1 page discussion and about 0.5-0.75 page references. Remember, you need to motivate the study–explain how it relates to conversations in the field. What gap does it address? Provide the theoretical grounding for the work and review relevant prior literature (especially literature from the Learning Sciences or CSCL, depending on which conference you are submitting to). Describe the methods briefly but with enough substance for readers to understand the general approach and how you went about analyzing the data. Describe the results and help the reader understand how they relate to your research questions and the theories you are drawing on. Make sure to help the reader make connections—do the work of interpreting the findings for the reader. In the discussion relate your specific findings to ongoing conversations in the field–how does this work extend what we know and contribute new insights that go beyond the specifics of your study. Use relevant references but keep it tight—cite the most relevant and most recent.

We do accept reviews to either conference (ICLS or CSCL) but they need to provide some novel insights. These reviews should synthesize the literature in ways that contribute to new understandings.

While we encourage authors to submit work that aligns with the meeting theme, this is not part of the evaluation criteria.

The most common issues observed in prior submissions have included, amongst others, conference alignment and coherency of arguments. For example, a paper may be a good fit for ICLS but was submitted to CSCL. For this reason, we encourage authors to carefully review the difference between CSCL and ICLS. Regarding coherency of arguments, we encourage authors to articulate their research problem and contribution clearly. For example, “this has not been studied” is not a strong argument. A better argument would be “this is what we know and how we know it; this is what we have yet to know and how we will investigate it.” Also, please use the Submission Template & Guidelines when preparing your submission.

Please use the most recent version of the APA style format for references in other languages than English. This includes direct quotations in the text and the reference list. See for example: https://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2018/09/how-to-quote-a-foreign-language-source-and-its-translation.html. Also, see How to cite translated works (apa.org).

For papers (e.g., full papers, short papers, and posters) submitted for blinded review, avoid providing web links to sites or any other supplementary materials that may identify the authors. For papers submitted for non-blinded review (e.g., symposia) or for final paper uploads of accepted papers, links to supplemental resources are permitted but links should be relatively short to appear clean and concise.

Yes, the annual meeting is a great place for doctoral students to present their early work and refine their ideas with support from the ISLS community. Specifically, we encourage students to present one or two aspects of their doctoral work–for example specifically focusing on the theoretical framework, the methodology, or the research design–rather than the entirety of their PhD work, in order to receive more pertinent, focused feedback.

Alternatively, we are also proposing a Doctoral Consortium created to specifically help doctoral students. More information can be found on the Doctoral Consortium page of our website which will be coming soon.

For our purposes, there is not a difference, per se. The title “Interactive Tools & Demos” highlights the interactive nature of the proposed presentations.

Presenters must make their tool, software, or environment accessible to conference participants in whichever way is the most appropriate to encourage audience interaction.