NCHEP Submission Reviewers

The 11th National Conference on Higher Education in Prison is pleased to extend the invitation to review NCHEP submissions to the entire community of higher education in prison.

In line with the efforts of rendering the annual conference a collective and generative endeavor, we seek scholars, activists, and stakeholders in the field with a wide range of specializations, experiences, and expertise who are interested in offering feedback on proposals submitted to the 11th NCHEP. The review process will take place during two distinct time frames, and volunteers will be asked to select one of the following periods, or both: 

• ‍July 27 - August 10, 2021 
• August 18 - August 31, 2021 (extended time frame for proposals submitted by scholars who are currently incarcerated) 

Each reviewer will work on a maximum of five submissions: when completing the assigned reviews, volunteers will be offered a $50 discount on the registration fee for the 11th National Conference on Higher Education in Prison as a small token of gratitude for their labor. Reviewers who are unable to attend the conference will receive a $50 gift card. 

NCHEP Submission Review Rubric

All submissions for the 11th NCHEP will be reviewed by volunteers from the higher education in prison community of stakeholders.

Submissions will undergo an open review process, which means that the identities of both submitters and reviewers will be known to each other and disclosed at the start of the process. The decision to engage an open-review process is part of an effort to bring more transparency and equity to this submission process. Reviewers will be asked to provide feedback to authors based upon the following: 

Submission Essentials

• Did the submitter tend to honor the submission directions, including the word limits? (Y/N)
• Is the selected presentation format appropriate for the proposals? (Y/N) 

Presentation Overview

1. The content of this proposal is compelling: 0 – 10 (30%) 
2. The proposal presents original content/ideas: 0 – 10 (30%)
3. The content of this proposal fosters meaningful conversations or interactions: 0 – 10 (15%)
4. This proposal outlines clear and compelling ideas for how the audience/participants will be engaged (or offers a good explanation for why they will not be) during the discussion or presentation: 0 – 10 (15%)
5. This proposal advances the conference theme (‘What is To Be Done?’) in an impactful way: 0 – 10 (10%)
   

Reviewer Comments to Submitter

In an effort to continue to provide support to our community of stakeholders, we ask that you offer written feedback to the submitter/s, who will be able to see your comments and your name when receiving your written assessment. Please ensure that you offer some feedback on the following: Structure of the proposal; Strength of the proposal’s content; Potential engagement with the audience; Strategies to accomplish desired learning outcomes; Quality of the idea and/or argument.