The submissions for the EAPRIL 2022 conference are now closed and the review results have been announced. Please be invited to check out your review results in your user dashboard.
The following submission formats (with more detailed guidelines) will be welcomed:
PRESENT & DISCUSS
Present and Discuss Sessions allow presenters to present their research and findings in an in-depth manner. These presentations are individually submitted and have already data and results to present. Two or three presentations are scheduled together on similarities in topic, methodology and/or objectives. Each presenter is given 15 minutes presentation time followed by 10 minutes for questions and discussion. At the end of all presentations, a 10-minute collective discussion is organised by the chair.
Present & Discuss sessions consist of 3 linked presentations that are scheduled together in a 90-minute session.
For the Present & Discuss guidelines click here.
Symposia provide an opportunity to present research on one topic, often from multiple perspectives, compiling a coherent set of papers for discussion. Symposia sessions are directed by a chair, involving three presenters and one discussant. Each presenter will get 15 minutes to present his/her research. After all presentations, the discussant has 15 minutes to present his/her reflections on the preceding presentations and to introduce one or two general statements to the delegates. After these contributions, a general 30 minutes discussion is organised to discuss the theme of the symposium and the related statements in-depth.
Symposia are scheduled for 90 minutes.
For the symposium guidelines click here.
A poster communicates the main ideas, objectives, results and conclusions of an ongoing research project. Each presenter will be given 3-5 minutes to present his/her poster. Afterwards, the delegates have time to ask questions or start an in-depth discussion with the presenters. Finally, a general discussion (10-15 minutes) will take place in which the main ideas, conclusions and directions for future research and practice are discussed.
Poster sessions are scheduled for 90 minutes.
For the poster guidelines click here.
Workshops are a highly interactive, collaborative session format that demonstrates the practical outcomes of a research project. They induce learning-by-doing, hands-on experience, and an engagement in in-depth active learning. A formal presentation by the workshop leader as such should remain brief. Creative and/or innovative approaches are encouraged, such as brainstorming, associating, panel discussion, role play, debating, voting on statements, think tank, flipping-the-classroom, systemic approaches, simulations, mystery guest and so on.
Workshops are scheduled for 90 minutes.
For the workshop guidelines click here.
In this format practitioners are invited to present a case from practice. A research component can be added to this session but this is not a required condition. Instead, the floor is given to practitioners who wish to share their experiences when designing, implementing or evaluating a practice in class / school / college / university / workplace. In this format there is more time for reflection and in-depth discussion about the case via a hand-on approach. Within one session two thematically linked case studies will be presented. Each practitioner is offered 20 minutes to present his/her case followed by 25 minutes that are dedicated to an in-depth discussion with the audience.
A case study session consists of two linked case studies and is scheduled for 90 minutes.
For the case study guidelines click here.
A roundtable session focuses on unfinished or starting projects. In other words, the projects don't have to have actual results. This type of session will not be set-up as a formal presentation but rather as a talk between colleagues. No formal presentation by means of a slideshow presentation is expected. Instead, a 1 page screenshot is advised for the participants of your session that summarises the main ideas and questions central in the discussion. Each presenter will get 15 minutes to outline the main ideas and objectives of the project, as well as to propose 1 or 2 questions that he/she wishes to focus on. This is followed by a 30-minutes discussion per research project.
Two submissions are scheduled together in a timeslot of 90 minutes.
For the roundtable guidelines click here.
This type of session aims to provide an opportunity for delegates to explore and discuss collaboration in starting practice-based projects or research. This session requires no formal presentation but is intended to meet up with colleagues in a more informal context to explore and discuss potential partnerships or collaborations.
All meet-ups are organised together during one parallel timeslot of 90 minutes.
For the meet-up guidelines click here.
The EAPRIL Best Practice-Based Research Award wishes to acknowledge an outstanding and innovative project that deals with learning and development in the workplace and educational field. More specifically, practice-based research which has a profound impact on the development of both theory and practice is particularly of interest.
At the EAPRIL Conference the nominated projects get the chance to present their project during an exclusive plenary Award Session. The winner will be announced on the last day of the conference.
For the Award submission guidelines click here.
For more information on the procedure and criteria click here.
The thematic track format focuses on a specific theme and welcomes all contributions that fit within this theme. This year's theme is: "How to activate lifelong learning among employees in organizations".
All accepted submissions for the thematic track will be clustered together in one or two time slots of 90 minutes.
The thematic track call for submissions and guidelines can be found here.
The review process is the most important aspect of organising the EAPRIL conference, as the outcome of this process will determine the quality of the participants' experience. As a result, EAPRIL strives to ensure that the process is rigorous and transparent.
The review process will start once the submission deadline has passed and always consists of two rounds. In the first round all proposals will be reviewed by two reviewers. In the second round all proposals who received a discrepant result in the first round will be reviewed by a third reviewer. Results will be announced once these two round have been concluded.
You can find all review questions per format here.