WGC Workshop Review and Evaluation Process for DCS 2018
All proposals must meet the minimum criteria listed below. Proposals that do not objectively satisfy minimum criteria will be declined.
The working group committee will evaluate the proposals together. The subject matter of the workshop/session proposal must be of direct relevance to any of the thematic areas
- Access and Inclusion
- Internet Freedom and civil liberties
- Data Privacy, Encryption and Security
- Feminist Internet
- Online media, Misinformation and Fake News
- Digital Citizenship and Accountability
- Innovation and SDGs
Proposals must be complete and ready for consideration, with all fields of the proposal submission form completed
Every proposed session should have at least two provisionally confirmed speakers. A provisionally confirmed speaker is defined as “a speaker who has been contacted, and expressed interest and intent to participate”
No more than 3 proposals from any individual or institution will be accepted for consideration.
WGC members will have the opportunity to review and discuss declined proposals/research papers.
In evaluating workshop proposals, each WGC member will grade the proposal on the following criteria, giving each criterion a score from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest):
Relevance: Are the specific issues to be addressed by the proposal clearly correlated to the designated theme and relevant to the overarching theme of the Digital Citizen Summit 2017?
Content: Is the proposal well thought out and does it cover enough aspects of the issue(s) of interest?
Completeness: Does the proposal provide all information requested, specifically: fully expounded issues, intended discussion outcomes, viable approach to discussion, and the formation of panelists. The status of confirmation of panelists will also be taken into consideration.
Diversity: Does the proposed session represent viewpoints from multiple stakeholders and provide diverse geographical, economic, and cultural perspectives? Are there at least 2 different stakeholder groups on the panel? Is there gender balance observed on the panel? Are the listed panelists qualified to represent various distinct stakeholder groups? Does the session contribute to the overall diversity of the Digital Citizen Summit event?
Format: Is the session description consistent with the format listed (for example, if the format is open forum, then does the proposal describe how the open forum will be set up, with timings, etc., indicated; are all sides of the issues represented)?
The overall average score from 1 to 5 should mean the following in terms of ranking the session:
5: An excellent proposal.
4: A good proposal overall, although could be enhanced.
3: An average proposal.
2: A weak proposal.
1: Does not meet criteria
WGC members will look at the results to ensure an overall balance of the themes/topics. It is possible that for certain proposals, which scored just below the threshold of space and availability, the WGC will discuss whether to ask the proposers to make improvements to overcome deficiencies. Proposers will then be contacted and asked to submit a revised proposal.
In some cases, the WGC will receive workshop proposals that propose the same issues, topics and format. Due to constraints in space, these similar workshops will be invited to collaborate and “merge” together. In this case, the workshop proposers will be contacted by the organiser. In the event that the proposers decline to collaborate the workshop slot can fall vacant.
WGC members meeting: 6-10 July 2018 (TBC)