Completed submissions should be submitted via the Conftool system no later than October 15, 2019 11:59 PM EDT. Please submit your proposal at https://www.conftool.pro/dh2020/. All submissions will be asked to provide the following information, in addition to the required information associated with the formal type (below):

  • Format Type
  • Title of Submission
  • Name of Author(s)
  • Contact Information of Author(s)
  • Brief summary (for display in online program)
  • Language of Submission/Presentation
  • Geography, Temporal Area, Discipline & Method (selected from conference ontologies)
  • Acceptance of the ADHO Conference Code of Conduct
  • Acceptance of the Data Privacy Agreement
  • The submission abstract (as a either docx or PDF format)

 

Submission abstracts should:

  • Be clearly organized with attention to academic and/or professional writing standards 
  • Explicitly engage with relevant scholarship including providing references and justifications displaying knowledge of the current state of appropriate fields 
  • Identify if, and how, the submission contributes to the conference themes of Native American, Indigenous, and First Nations Studies; public digital humanities; or the open data movement
  • Direct address theoretical, methodological, or pedagogical frameworks that the submission engages with
  • Explicitly identity the purpose of the submission as it relates to the goals of the submission type 
  • Explicitly state the applicability, significance, and value of the theoretical, methodological, and/or practical contribution to the digital humanities generally

The more explicit and direct you can be in your submission the easier it is for reviewers to weigh your submission against the review criteria for the conference. Reviews do not wholly determine which proposals will be accepted or rejected. They provide expert information that the Program Committee uses in making its decisions. Reviewers also provide helpful, constructive feedback to authors, which can strengthen the quality and intellectual rigor of the conference. As such, we encourage you to avoid polemics, unsubstantiated claims, or wholesale rejections of theoretical, methodological, pedagogical and/or practical contributions without providing citations, references, and justifications.

It is essential that your submission be as succinct as possible, not contain extraneous language or references, and avoid asides or divergences that detract from the overall submission. To assist in that, we encourage authors to consider completing an independent peer-review of their submission by colleagues prior to submission. This can help you identify any areas that might need improvement prior to the final submission.

Representing the conference theme of “open access”, DH2020 will use the open peer review process, which requires submitter and reviewer identities to be disclosed to one another. Reviews themselves will remain confidential to the submitter, reviewers, and the members of the Program Committee. We ask discretion on the part of all involved to ensure that reviewing meets the conference code of conduct. It is not appropriate to share review information via email, social media, or other communications outlets either privately or publicly. 

Authors will be able to read comments by reviewers who have been assigned to review their submission.  Submitters will have the opportunity to provide a 300 word maximum written response to reviewer concerns regarding their submission. This response should clearly address any concerns identified by reviewers and provide information on what corrective actions will be taken. The Program Committee will consider the original submission, all reviews, the response to reviews by authors, as well as discussions and reviews conducted by the Program Committee. Acceptance, either in the format requested or in an alternate format, is the sole discretion of the Program Committee.

Please note that we encourage all authors to be aware of both explicit and implicit bias in the conference process. Biases are developed through our background, cultural environment, and personal experiences. Importantly, the program committee for DH2020 reminds all authors that explicit or implicit bias can negatively shape the submission itself, the reviewing process, the conference program, and the conference as a whole. The Program Committee reserves the right to reject a submission should we feel that it has been shaped by explicit or implicit bias. 

Types of Proposals

Proposals may be of seven types: (1) poster presentations; (2) lightning talks; (3) short presentations; (4) long presentations; (5) panels; (6) forums; (7) pre-conference workshops and tutorials. Based on peer review and its mandate to create a balanced and varied program, the Program Committee may offer acceptance in a different category from the one initially proposed. 

Conference participants may not present in more than two paper or panel sessions. If more than two submissions considered for acceptance include the name of an individual presenter or co-presenter, then during the final review phase the chairs of the program committee will contact that participant and ask them which submission(s) they will withdraw to avoid exceeding that limit. This limit does not pertain to poster or lightning talk submissions. All formats are subject to peer review and should not be considered lesser than any other presentation format. Instead, the format selected should match the goals of the proposed submission.

Note that the examples below are simply to highlight possible ways to construct one’s abstract. Abstract lengths, author composition, and criteria used must meet the itemized DH2020 requirements by type.

Poster Presentations

Poster proposals (abstract maximum: 250-500 words) may describe work on any specific topics or methods or present projects and software tools in any stage of development. Posters will be 24×36 inches (610 x 914 mm). We are unable to provide access to monitors, electrical outlets, or furniture to support laptops and other technologies. Poster presentations are intended to elicit conversations and offer opportunity to exchange ideas one-on-one with attendees. Presenters are expected to remain with their poster for the duration of their scheduled poster session. Submissions in this category are strongly encouraged.

Example Poster Presentation Abstracts:

Yuta Hashimoto,  Kenro Aihara, Susumu Hayashi, Minao Kukita, and Makoto Ohura, The SMART-GS Project: An Approach to Image-based Digital Humanities, DH2015.

Isabel Galina and Ernesto Priani, Check! An Online Tool for the Recognition and Evaluation of DH Work, DH2015.

Lightning Talks

Lightning talk proposals (abstract maximum: 200-250 words) are dedicated to a 5 minute presentation of a single project, idea, technology, or problem. It is intended to either solicit feedback from peers or to advertise the release of a new project, dataset, or tool. Submissions in this category are strongly encouraged.

Example Lightning Talk Abstracts:

American Historical Association, 2018 Digital Humanities Lightning Talks, https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/digital-history-resources/aha18-digital-projects-lightning-round

Association of College & Research Libraries, 2019 Lightning Talks, https://conference.acrl.org/lightning/

US National Endowment for the Humanities, 2012 Project Director’s Meeting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahuULHlcsoU&feature=youtu.be

Short Presentations

Short presentation proposals (abstract maximum: 250-500 words) are intended to be dynamic 10-minute presentations appropriate for reporting on works in progress, limited scholarly interventions, or for describing a singular tool or project. Short-paper submissions seek to open dialogues among scholars working on related topics. Short presentations are eligible for the Fortier Prize, which explicitly recognizes early career scholars’ work. Those who wish to be considered for the Fortier Prize prize are required to submit their curriculum vitae to verify eligibility after their submission has been accepted to the conference.

Example Short Presentation Abstracts:

Nora McGregor, Mia Ridge, Stella Wisdom, Aquiles Alencar-Brayner, The Digital Scholarship Training Programme at British Library: Concluding Report & Future Developments, DH2016. 

Natalie Houston, Enjambment and the Poetic Line: Towards a Computational Poetics, DH2014.

Long Presentations

Proposals for long presentations (abstract maximum: 500-750 words) should deal with substantial completed research, report the development of new methodologies; or present rigorous theoretical, speculative, or critical discussions. Individual submissions will be allocated 15 minutes for presentation and 5 minutes for questions. Long-paper submissions seek substantive feedback and discussion of the submission’s relationship to other scholarship in the field. Long presentations are eligible for the Fortier Prize, which explicitly recognizes early career scholars’ work. Those who wish to be considered for the Fortier Prize prize are required to submit their curriculum vitae to verify eligibility after their submission has been accepted to the conference.

Example Long Presentation Abstracts:

Natalia Caldas, Élika Ortega, Jiménez Mavillard, David Brown, Juan Luis Suárez, The Landscapes of Casta Paintings: Depictions of Social Anxieties in XVIII Century New Spanish Art. DH2014.

Elena Pierazzo and Geoffroy Noël, Modelling Digital Editing: Of Texts, Documents and Works, DH 2014.

Panels

Panels (abstract maximum: 250 words for overview, plus 300-500 words for each paper) should focus on a single theme and be inherently coherent in presenting a substantial body of research or a research question. A panel should be conceived as a 90-minute session of four to six speakers. Those submitting proposals for panels are advised to ensure that the constitution of the panel reflects the constitution of the field and/or research topic that is being addressed and ADHO’s expressed commitment to diversity or to explicitly address problems in those areas. 

In case the proposer’s own network is too limited, the Program Committee can advise them prior to submission on whom to contact to broaden the panel. Please contact the PC chairs if you need advice.

Example Panel Presentation Abstracts:

Øyvind Eide, Karl Grossner, Merrick Lex Berman, Christian Emil-Ore, Issues in Spatio-Temporal Technologies for the Arts and Humanities, DH2013.

Eduard  Arriaga,  Andrés Villar, Yvone Captain-Hidalgo, Maria Cecilia Martino, Accessing Alternative Histories and Futures: Afro-Latin American Models for the Digital Humanities, DH2017.

Amy Earhart, Alex Gil, Roopika Risam, Barbara Bordalejo, Isabel Galina, Lorna Hughes, and Melissa Terras, Quality Matters: Diversity and the Digital Humanities in 2016, DH2016.

Forums

Forums (abstract maximum: 500 words) should focus on a single thematic or methodological challenge and be designed to facilitate a conversation at large with the digital humanities community. The forum should be conceived as a 90-minute discussion with at least three facilitators. Those submitting proposals for forums are advised to ensure that the proposal explicitly addresses how attendees will contribute.

In case the proposer’s own network is too limited, the Program Committee can advise them prior to submission on whom to contact to broaden the panel. Please contact the PC chairs if you need advice.

Example Forum Presentation Abstracts:

Syd Bauman, David Hoover, Karina van Dalem-Oskam, Wendell Piez, Text Analysis meets Text Encoding, DH2012.

Pre-Conference Workshops and Tutorials

Tutorials and workshops are either 1) a two-hour session or 2) a four-hour session on specific techniques, software packages, or theoretical approaches with a small number of participants. All proposals should include:

  • title and brief description of the content or topic and its relevance to the digital humanities community (not more than 250 words);
  • full contact information for all tutorial instructors or workshop leaders, including links to relevant cvs or teaching materials;
  • description of target audience and expected number of participants (based, if possible, on past experience); 
  • requirements for technical support, including software installation (the conference will handle traditional technological support, but workshop organizers are expected to manage specific needs such as access to software, servers, etc.).
  • a syllabus for the proposed workshop or tutorial (the syllabus may include relevant readings that may be assigned, tutorials or training guides, and/or an outline of learning outcomes and assignments).
  • preferred duration: two hours or four hours

Workshops are expected to be self-financing in terms of hardware and software needs as well as coffee and lunch for participants. Participants in pre- and post-conference workshops and tutorials are required to register for the full conference as well as pay an additional fee to the conference for the workshop. Convenors of the pre- and post-conference workshops and tutorials are required to register for the conference. Please ensure that the constitution of the workshop reflects the constitution of the field and/or research topic that is being addressed; ADHO’s expressed commitment to diversity; or explicitly addresses problems in those areas. In case the proposer’s own network is too limited, the Program Committee can advise them before submission on whom to contact to broaden the panel. Please contact the PC chairs if you need advice.

Example Workshop Proposals:

Harvey Quamen, Constance Crompton, and Paul Hjartarson, Prosopography Workshop, DH2014

Ernesto Priego, Archiving Small Twitter Datasets For Text Analysis: A Workshop For Beginners, DH2018


Ten Tips for Submissions

  1. Be aware of the Review Criteria.
  2. Define or omit jargon; write clearly and directly.
  3. Only list the presenter(s) as the submission’s author(s); all other members of the team may be listed as the first citation or via acknowledgements.
  4. Include citations and links that would benefit the submission.
  5. Provide specifics with regards to the project, method, claims, or conclusions.
  6. Ensure your proposed submission will fit in the time (or space for posters) allotted
  7. Where possible, refer to the conference theme.
  8. Highlight the significance of your contribution explicitly.
  9. Be aware of the current practices with regards to the format of your submission (e.g. consider accessibility guidelines, issues of diversity and inclusion, as well as considerations of an international audience).
  10. Recognize that your contribution to the conference, no matter whether it is accepted or not, is a service to the digital humanities. Make sure to note it on your cv.
[BTEN id="283"]