Scoring Rubric, Peer Review, and Acceptance Process

​

The Chicago International Summit on Education welcomes research-based submissions as well as a limited number of workshop and best-practice presentations. Different review and selection processes apply depending on the type of submission.

Research abstracts are evaluated through the Summit's formal double-blind peer-review process using the scoring criteria described below. Workshop and best-practice/nonresearch submissions do not undergo the formal research peer-review process and are considered separately by the Conference Organizing Committee.

​

1. Research Abstract Evaluation Criteria

Research abstracts will be evaluated in the following seven areas:

​

a) Relevance to the Conference Theme and Topic

• To what extent does the research meaningfully relate to the 2027 Summit theme, “Navigating Educational Transitions: Building Resilient and Future-Ready Learning Systems,” and/or the selected conference topic?

• Does the study demonstrate clear relevance to the conference topic under which it was submitted?

• Does the research contribute to issues relevant to educational transitions, changing learning environments, resilient learning systems, future readiness, or other dimensions of the broader conference theme?

b) Importance and Contribution of the Research

• Does the study address an important educational problem, issue, or research question?

• Does the research demonstrate originality or offer a meaningful contribution?

• Does the study have the potential to contribute to educational research or knowledge?

c) Clarity of Research Purpose

• Are the purpose and objectives of the study clearly presented?

• Can the reader clearly understand what the study investigates and why the research was conducted?

• Are the research question(s), objectives, and/or hypotheses sufficiently clear?

d) Research Design and Methodology

• Is the research design and methodological approach appropriate for addressing the stated research question(s) or objectives?

• Are the participants, sample, population, or data sources adequately described?

• Are the data collection procedures, measures, and analytical methods sufficiently described?

• Does the abstract provide sufficient methodological information to evaluate the quality and rigor of the research?

e) Findings / Results

• Are the study's key findings or results clearly presented?

• Are the findings appropriately connected to the research question(s) or objectives?

• Are the findings adequately supported by the research described?

• Are the results sufficiently substantive for a research presentation?

f) Conclusions and Significance

• Do the conclusions logically follow from and accurately reflect the findings?

• Does the study demonstrate meaningful significance for education?

• Does the research offer relevant implications for educational research, policy, practice, and/or future research?

• Does the work have the potential to contribute to understanding or improving educational transitions and/or resilient and future-ready learning systems?

g) Overall Scholarly Quality

• Is the abstract coherent, well organized, and clearly written?

• Is there appropriate alignment among the research purpose, methodology, findings, and conclusions?

• Does the submission demonstrate appropriate scholarly and methodological rigor?

• Is the research suitable for presentation at an international education conference?

​

2. Research Abstract Peer-Review Process

Research abstracts submitted for consideration as paper or poster presentations undergo a double-blind peer-review process and are independently evaluated by at least two members of the Summit's Review Board.

The purpose of the peer-review process is to support a high-quality, rigorous, relevant, and engaging program of research presentations. Reviewers evaluate each abstract according to the published criteria and consider the quality of the research, relevance to the Summit theme and selected conference topic, methodological rigor, clarity of findings, significance, and potential contribution to educational research and knowledge.

Research may be at different stages of development, provided that the abstract contains sufficient information for reviewers to assess the research purpose, methodological approach, scholarly contribution, and findings or outcomes appropriate to the stage of the study.

Reviewer scores, written comments, and recommendations are provided to the Conference Organizing Committee to inform final acceptance decisions.

​

3. Scoring Scale for Research Abstracts

Each of the seven research evaluation criteria is scored using the following four-point scale:

1 – Does Not Meet Expectations
The criterion is not adequately addressed, significant weaknesses are present, or insufficient information is provided to permit an appropriate assessment.

2 – Partially Meets Expectations
The criterion is addressed, but important weaknesses, limitations, or issues of clarity remain.

3 – Meets Expectations
The criterion is adequately and clearly addressed and demonstrates an appropriate level of scholarly quality.

4 – Exceeds Expectations
The criterion is addressed exceptionally well and demonstrates a high level of scholarly quality, rigor, clarity, and/or contribution.

With seven scored criteria, a research abstract may receive a maximum evaluation score of 28 points.

Numerical scores are one component of the review process and do not independently determine acceptance. Reviewer comments and recommendations, scholarly quality, relevance, and the overall composition and needs of the conference program may also be considered in final decisions.

​​

4. Research Presentation Acceptance Decisions

Acceptance decisions for research presentations are based primarily on the scholarly quality and merit of the submitted research, as assessed through the Summit's double-blind peer-review process.

The academic title, institutional affiliation, or career stage of an author is not used as a criterion for evaluating the scholarly quality of a research abstract. The Summit welcomes submissions from graduate students, early-career researchers, established scholars, educators, and other researchers whose work contributes to the advancement of education.

Final decisions regarding acceptance and presentation format are made by the Conference Organizing Committee after consideration of peer-review evaluations, reviewer comments and recommendations, and the overall composition and needs of the conference program.

Accepted research may be assigned as a paper presentation or poster presentation. Reviewer recommendations regarding presentation format are considered; however, final placement is determined by the Organizing Committee based on the nature of the research, program structure, scheduling, and available presentation capacity.

The Summit seeks to foster an internationally diverse program representing a range of educational contexts, perspectives, institutions, countries, and career stages while maintaining the scholarly standards established through the peer-review process.

​

5. Workshop and Best-Practice / Nonresearch Submissions

The Summit also welcomes a limited number of workshop and best-practice presentations that provide meaningful opportunities for professional learning, knowledge exchange, and engagement with conference participants.

Workshop and best-practice/nonresearch submissions do not undergo the formal research peer-review process and are not evaluated using the research abstract scoring rubric above.

These submissions are reviewed directly by the Conference Organizing Committee. Selection is based on factors including:

• Relevance to the Summit theme and conference topics

• Potential value and usefulness to conference participants

• Quality and clarity of the proposed session

• Opportunities for participant learning and engagement, where applicable

• Contribution to the diversity and balance of the conference program

• Available presentation space and scheduling capacity

Acceptance of workshop and best-practice/nonresearch submissions is limited and subject to program availability. Submission of a proposal does not guarantee inclusion in the conference program.

The Conference Organizing Committee reserves final discretion regarding acceptance, presentation format, scheduling, and program placement.

​

6. Conference Presentation and Publication

Acceptance to present at the Chicago International Summit on Education constitutes acceptance for conference presentation and does not constitute acceptance for publication.

A full paper is not required for conference presentation. Accepted abstracts will be included in the official Chicago International Summit on Education Program Booklet.

Authors of accepted research presentations are encouraged to consider developing their conference research into a full manuscript for submission to Future Review: International Journal of Transition, College and Career Success, an academic journal affiliated with the Chicago International Summit on Education.

Submission to Future Review is optional and separate from conference acceptance. Acceptance to present at the Summit does not guarantee publication in the journal. Manuscripts submitted to Future Review must meet the journal's submission requirements and undergo the journal's independent editorial and peer-review process.

Questions regarding the review or acceptance process may be directed to info@chicagosummit.org.