Guidelines for Writing an Abstract

Proposals for contributions are welcome from all fields of educational research. Participants are
invited to hand in up to two abstracts for papers, posters, workshops, round tables and symposia.
All proposals must be submitted electronically via www.conftool.com/ecer2013
The submission should contain a maximum of 500 - 850 words + references and needs to be
composed along the following themes:
Title of proposal
Authors(s) of proposal including affiliations and email addresses
First and second choice network
Some networks will ask for identifying sub-themes
3 - 5 keywords
General description on research questions, objectives and theoretical framework (up to 500
words)
Methods/methodology (up to 200 words)
Expected outcomes/results (up to 200 words)
Intent of publication References (300 words)
It is not possible to include tables or graphs in the submission form.
Please note that you will be asked to select a first and second choice network to which your
proposal will be submitted. Choose wisely- in the occasion that your submission needs to be
redirected, it will only be redirected to the second choice network!
You need to indicate all contributing authors along with their affiliations and email addresses, and
to specify who will be presenting. Fill in this information carefully; mis-spellings and missing email
addresses may mean that co-authors are not correctly linked to all their contributions.
The Submission form for Round Tables and Symposia will ask for additional information: You need
to nominate a Chairperson for your Round Table and a Chairperson + Discussant for a Symposium.
You will also be asked to hand in short abstracts (200 Words) of all papers within your symposium.
*** *** *** ***
Review Criteria
Proposals for contributions are welcome from all fields of educational research. The criteria used in
reviewing each proposal will be as follows:
The proposal should be directly related to a topic of interest for educational research;
it should involve systematic enquiry of an empirical or analytic nature and should make
reference to a theoretical framework;
the background, method, results and implications should be set out clearly in a manner which is
accessible to an international audience;
it should take account of the European and/or international context;
it should help a European dialogue to develop by reference, for example, to current European
policies or intellectual and educational traditions; and
Symposium submissions and roundtables need to include 3 different countries/national
perspectives.
Before submitting please consider the following questions, as neglecting these issues might lead to
the rejection of your submission. Quotations taken from reviewer-comments on rejected proposals
from previous years will help you understand how reviewers evaluate your proposals
**** *** *** *** *** *** ***

How to Avoid Rejection
How to Avoid Rejection
Is your language clear and understandable?
Did you provide enough information on all fields to allow the reviewers to judge the proposals?
Does your proposal present a clear research question? Does it identify a theoretical framework,
methodology and conclusions?
Did you define a clear focus for your presentation and did you link it to your chosen networks?
Is your submission presenting research?
Did you highlight the European focus/dimension of your submission?
Is your language clear and understandable?
Bear in mind that weak language and spelling mistakes may prevent reviewers from understanding
your basic ideas. If necessary ask a native speaker for help.
The number of English language mistakes in the text is so large that sometimes it becomes
difficult to understand what the author wants to say. Please ask a native speaker for help."
Did you provide enough information on all fields to allow the reviewers
to judge the proposals?
Some abstract are very brief and fail to provided information on all fields included in the review
form. As a consequence it can be difficult for reviewers to judge adequately the merits of the
proposal.
This paper proposal is much too short - it remains unclear with regards to content, method, and
theoretical approach.
Does your proposal present a clear research question? Does it identify
a theoretical framework, methodology and conclusions?
Be as precise as possible and present your abstract as a coherent entity in which inconsistencies
between research question, methodology and outcomes are avoided. It is essential that you link
your methodology with the research question, and link your outcomes with the theoretical
framework, research questions and methodology.
The abstract doesn't meet the requirements. The author is neither presenting the research
questions, expected outcomes nor the methodology of her research.
An outline of the theoretical framework and the research questions should be provided, the
findings of the study and their interpretation should be connected with the theoretical framework.
It is unclear in the proposal what the focus is given the very general over-view of time and subject
matter. There is insufficient evidence here of methodology, sources and research question
To top
Did you define a clear focus for your presentation and did you link it to
your chosen networks?
Avoid being too general in your description. The reviewers need to understand the focus of your
presentation in order to evaluate it and to judge whether it fits into the focus of the network.
This proposal is very general, not precise enough to understand the interest of the research. It is
too general to raise sufficient interest in the context of our Network.
Focus and argument are not contemporary: there is much written on the broad topic already so
any contemporary paper needs to do something new.
It is unclear in the proposal what the focus is given the very general over-view of time and subject
matter. There is insufficient evidence here of methodology, sources and research question
Is your submission presenting research?
Is there sufficient data to be presented? An ECER presentation needs to formulate a research
problem or questions and to provide a scientific line of argumentation. Sometimes submitters hand
in presentations dealing with research projects in the early stages. Please bear in mind that you
should already have some data that can be presented at ECER.
This is a promising study; but it is not sufficiently advanced yet to be presented at a congress:
data collection and analysis is not yet well defined; and the questions asked have to be more
precise.
Did you highlight the European focus/dimension of your submission?
One of the key guidelines for submission to ECER is that proposals should be based on more than
one European country / system. Proposals should either include some comparative element or
show implications of your research for other countries.
The proposal is too country-specific and does not have much of an explicit European or global
dimension.
This proposal addresses issues concerning national questions, but a reference to consequences for
the topic within a European context should also be addressed.