|Reviewing Phase||Start Date||End Date|
|Reviewing||Saturday, October 9, 2021||Wednesday, October 27, 2021|
|Discussion & Recommendations||Thursday, October 28, 2021||Monday, November 1, 2021|
Posters provide an opportunity for an informal presentation featuring “give and take” with conference attendees. Presenting a poster is also a good way in which to discuss and receive feedback on work in progress that has not been fully developed into a paper.
Posters should not be previously published, as a paper or a poster.
Poster submissions will be reviewed using the dual-anonymous review process (see below).
Dual-Anonymous Review Process
Initial submissions to the Posters track are reviewed with the dual-anonymous review process, in which authors must anonymize their submissions — thus reviewers (and APCs for papers) are unaware of the author — and reviewers and APCs 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.
Keep in mind that posters are meant to be a place to present and receive feedback on work that is in progress. 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.
Here are some tips and good practices for reviewing gathered from the SIGCSE community during SIGCSE TS 2021.
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.
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.
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.