Contact Us | Donate | Advertise Follow us on TwitterFollow us on facebookFollow us on LinkedIn

tfzfnvxz.jpg

For the most complete display of articles, please login.

Editor - Christine Willis, AHIP
Copy & Production Editor - Charlene M. Dundek
Full Editorial team - Access here
MLAConnect is updated continually. Most articles are restricted to MLA members and/or to members of specific MLA sections. For the most complete display of articles, please login.
Submit to MLAConnect.
Refer to the MLA Style Manual when writing articles.
Products, services, and events published in MLAConnect do not constitute MLA’s endorsement or approval. Opinions expressed in MLAConnect are the authors’ and do not necessarily express those of the association.

January Events

MLAConnect < Article detail

MLA | SLA ’23 Contributed Content Update

As we mentioned in our update last week, the abstract submissions for Round 1 are in! Both MLA and SLA volunteers are hard at work now, reviewing all the abstracts. We will be notifying submitters for Round 1 submissions in early December.

As one of the abstract reviewers, I am very impressed by the high quality and interesting topics reflected in the submissions! MLA | SLA ‘23 is truly going to be a great meeting!

Here’s a look at what the review process is like this year.

The National Program Committee (NPC) held a call for reviewers in October for MLA members to review abstracts submitted for session types that have traditionally reflected MLA contributed content (Research and Program papers and Immersion sessions). The 36 MLA volunteers have undergone live training provided by NPC volunteers to learn about the process of completing a review. Reviewers also have copies of the abstract rubric, which is also available publicly on MLANET.

Research and program description abstracts undergo anonymous reviews; all identifying information has been stripped out of each submission by the digital submission and review platform. The digital review platform ensures that reviewers do not review their own abstracts. Every research and program description abstract is reviewed by three different volunteers, who provide feedback based on the rubric using a Likert scale.

Each presenter who submitted a research or program description abstract has had the opportunity to indicate whether or not they would like to receive the reviewers’ feedback. For abstracts that have not been accepted in Round 1, many presenters use the feedback provided by the reviewers to adjust their abstracts and resubmit for a poster or lightning talk session in Round 2.

Immersion Session abstracts are not anonymized. Details such as the name and qualifications of the session speakers or participants can be helpful to reviewers who are assessing the potential quality, impact and audience appeal of the proposal. The National Program Committee scores Immersion Session abstracts using the provided rubric.

Proposals submitted to sessions that have traditionally been SLA content areas (Education Sessions and Contributed Papers) undergo a similar review process. The submissions are anonymized via the review platform and SLA reviewers use a standardized set of questions to provide feedback. Abstracts for these session types will also receive feedback in early December and presenters are invited to revise their proposals and submit for Round 2 session types as well.

Round 2 submissions for Posters and Lightning Talks will open December 15, 2022 and close on January 26, 2023.

You will be able to look through the accepted sessions and the initial schedule in the MLA | SLA ’23 Preliminary Program, which will be provided as a digital flipbook in January 2023. This is going to be an incredible meeting, and the abstracts reflect a wealth of knowledge and impressive research. I can’t wait for you to see it all!

If no content displays, it may be because the access to this article is member-only. Please login below, and then use the back page control to get back from the home page to the page displaying the article.