Demos Review Guidelines
Review Timeline
| Reviewing Phase | Start Date | End Date |
|---|---|---|
| Reviewing | Saturday, October 24, 2020 | Wednesday, November 11, 2020 |
| Discussion & Recommendations | Thursday, November 12, 2020 | Monday, November 16, 2020 |
Overview
Demos provide a way to showcase an educational tool or project in a live setting. Not designed to be sales pitches, demonstrations are a way for the community to see the relevance, potential and innovation of the tool and allow time for discussion with its creator.
For SIGCSE TS 2021, Demos will be a maximum of 20 minutes each, with at least 10-15 minutes allocated for answering questions. The Demo format is significantly different this year with Demos held in a regular session at a fixed timeslot, rather than during coffee breaks where the longer time slot was used to accommodate audience members arriving at different times. These changes have been introduced to accommodate the virtual setting of the symposium to the best extent possible.
Single-Anonymous Review Process
Initial submissions to the Demos track are reviewed with the single-anonymous review process, where the submissions are not anonymized but reviewers are anonymous to each other and to the authors. During the discussion of a submission in EasyChair, reviewers can refer to each other by their reviewer number on that submission’s review.
Review Guidelines
As you write your review, please keep in mind that the Demos are meant to be interactive. Do the authors describe how they plan to engage with attendees? Do the proposed activities fit into the (new for SIGCSE TS 2021) 20-minute time frame?
Please provide constructive feedback and clearly justify your choice of rating to help the authors. A review that gives a low score with no written comments is not helpful to the authors since it simply tells the authors that they have been unsuccessful, with no indication of how or why.
Reviewers will be asked to summarize the work, provide their familiarity with the submission topic, describe the expected audience, identify strengths and weaknesses of the submissions, and provide an overall evaluation. Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the program committee to address concerns about the submission. These comments will not be shared with submitting authors.
While your review text should clearly support your scores and recommendation, please do not include your preference for acceptance or rejection of a submission in the feedback to the authors. Instead, use the provided radio buttons to make a recommendation (the authors will not see this) based on your summary review and provide any details that refer to your recommendation directly in the confidential comments to the APC or track chairs. Remember that as a reviewer, you will only see a small portion of the submissions, so one that you recommend for acceptance may be rejected when considering the other reviewer recommendations and the full set of submissions.
Discussion
The discussion and recommendation period provides the opportunity for the Track Chairs to discuss reviews and feedback so they can provide the best recommendation for acceptance or rejection to the Program Chairs and that the submission is given full consideration in the review process. We ask that Reviewers engage in discussion when prompted by other reviewers, the Track Chairs by using the Comments feature of EasyChair. During this period you will be able to revise your review based on the discussion, but you are not required to do so.
The Track Chairs will make a final recommendation to the Program Chairs from your feedback.
Recalcitrant Reviewers
Reviewers who don’t submit reviews, have reviews with limited constructive feedback, or who submit inappropriate reviews will be removed from the reviewer list (as per SIGCSE policy). Recalcitrant reviewers will be informed of their removal from the reviewer list. Reviewers with repeated offenses (two within a three year period) will be removed from SIGCSE reviewing for three years.