Proposal selection

We have been asked how proposals (also known as abstracts) for papers for ICHF 2011 are selected. Please see the blogs below for details of how and when proposals were to be submitted. Please note that the closing date for the submission of proposals has now passed and cannot be accpted - not for this conference away!

This blog entry is to outline the process used to select proposals submitted by the closing date for ICHF 2011.

The process of selecting proposals is known as 'blind peer review' which ensures the anonymity of those submitting proposals. In this way the identity of members of the Academic Committee commenting on the proposals is unknown to the researcher who submitted the proposal.

All proposals are sent to an independent body, in the case of ICHF this is the conference organiser (Northern Networking Events), who have no connection with the Academic Committee. Once the deadline for the submission of proposals has passed all references to the author are removed in order that they cannot be attributed to any individual. In other words all that remains is a succinct resume of the author's idea for the paper to be presented at the conference.

These ideas (proposals) are then sent to the Chairman of the Academic Committee who examines them before sending them onto members of the committee for their scrutiny. Neither he, nor they, have any knowledge as to the identity of the author of the proposal. They then assess the proposals on the basis of their expert knowledge. There are three recommendations that members can offer: Accept, Accept with Modifications or Reject. This is known as the 'Green, Amber and Red' system and allows for the fairest and most accurate means of assessment.

Proposals which receive Green or Red decisions obviously mean Accept or Reject. The other category which means 'undecided' is Amber. This is a tentative acceptance of the proposal but one with qualifications. This means that committee members think that the proposal has merit but needs some further refinement. The recommendations of the committee as to how best to adjust the proposal are communicated to the author who must re-submit their proposal in light of the comments of the members of the Academic Committee.

The next blog will explain what happens next...

The ICHF Team

Proposals scrutinised & researchers notified

More than 110 proposals for papers to be delivered at ICHF 2011 were received and were sent to the Academic Committee. For information on the Academic Committee please go to the ICHF web site or click on the following link: ICHF Academic Committee

Andreas Onnerfors is the Chairman of the Academic Committee. One of his responsibilities, among many, is the distribution of proposals to members of the Committee for assessment and on their return to collate the comments on the proposals. The results of the assessment process are then notified to those who submitted proposals. All who submitted proposals have now been notified of the results.

The next Blog will explain in more detail the process of assessing proposals.

The ICHF Team

Plenary Speakers Announced!

We acknowledge that there has been a delay in announcing the Plenary Speakers for ICHF 2011 but these have now been decided and are: 

• Arturo de Hoyos
• Andreas Onnerfors
• Chernoh Sesay, Jr
• Steven Bullock
• Robert Cooper

Further details of each individual will be posted here in due course.

The ICHF Team