Regardless of your research area, we encourage you to consider your work through the perspective of the conference theme Critical Responses to Enduring Challenges in Mathematics Education. By collectively focusing on enduring challenges in our field, the conference will catalyze collective reflection, collaborative inquiry, and discussion toward a better understanding of how to effectively and critically respond to them. The relationship of proposals to the theme will be one of the reviewing criteria.
Things to keep in mind as you prepare your proposal:
- All proposals must be blind for review.
- All proposals must be submitted in English electronically. Please convert your word document to a .pdf prior to uploading the proposal in All Academic. Please verify that the .pdf proposal is within the maximum page limits prior to uploading to All Academic.
- Proposals should not use endnote or other automatic reference software
- The deadlines are firm: February 16 by 11:59pm Eastern for Research Reports and Brief Research Reports, March 16 by 11:59pm Eastern for Posters and Working Groups
- An individual may serve as the primary presenting author for only one Research Report.
- An individual may be co-author on multiple Research proposals, however, the (co) author who electronically submits a proposal is committing to present the work at the conference and can do so for only one Research Report proposal. This person must also register for the conference by the speaker registration deadline for an accepted proposal to remain on the program. Currently there is no policy for Brief Research Report or Poster proposals, thus an individual may submit a Brief Research Report or Poster proposal in addition to a Research Report proposal.
- Page limits for all session types include references.
- There will be time for only minor revisions of accepted papers, thus is it essential to carefully format proposals according to the proceedings guidelines.
- For those who find it useful, we provide a proposal template
- Reviewers will be asked to rate each proposal on specific criteria tailored to different types of proposals.
Before entering the All Academic system to submit a proposal, consider the following:
- If you are submitting a joint proposal
- The person submitting the proposal should be a presenting author as it is that person who will need to register by the speaker registration deadline of August 1, 2015 for an accepted proposal to remain in the program.
- Each co-author will need to create an account in the All Academic system. This can be quickly done by following the directions on the All Academic PME-NA 2015 login page. The person submitting the proposal will then be able to identify them as co-authors.
- As part of the submission process, you will be asked questions to provide information to help with reviewing and with organizing the program and proceedings:
- Identify one of 10 different strands*
- Provide a maximum 15-word title, centered, all uppercase, bold, Times New Roman 12-point font
- Provide a maximum 100-word description (this will appear in the conference program)
- Provide a maximum 10-line (15 lines for Working Groups) abstract. (This is separate from the 100-word description for the conference program. Many people read the descriptions and abstracts to decide whether to attend a presentation, so make sure that both succinctly capture the essence of your paper.)
- Choose the type of research (quantitative, qualitative, mixed-methods or theoretical)
- Identify up to four relevant key words
- Indicate your willingness to present in a different format than the one proposed (e.g., a Brief Research Report or Poster if submitting a Research Report)
*Those submitting proposals for working groups will not be asked to choose a strand
Authors are responsible for removing any information from their proposals that might lead a reviewer to discern their identities or affiliations. All references in the author line, within the text (as citations, footnotes, webpages, etc.), and within the reference list for each author must be blinded. More specifically, leave blank spaces at the top of the proposal for author information to be inserted later if the proposal is accepted. Within the text, mask author’s self-citations of published work for each author and for each citation with any author, regardless of authorship order. Replace your author names with “Author” in both in-text citations and reference entries. For example, instead of “In our analysis we found that… (Bartell & Bieda, 2004)” write “In our analysis we found that… (Authors, 2004).” If in the aforementioned example only Bieda is a proposing author, the citation should still be blinded. Be sure active website links are replaced at this stage with blind placeholders (e.g., PROJECT WEBSITE), that NSF-numbers are blinded (e.g., PROJECT NUMBER), and that references in footnotes or tables are also checked and blinded. Reference entries in the reference list for author self-citations should be re-alphabetized under “A for Authors” rather than leaving the entries in their original placement in the section. Reference entries for “Author” should show only Author and the year. DO NOT include article titles, DOIs, or other identifying information.