2023 Conference Banner 2023 Conference Banner


For Program Chairs

Access NEMO Paper Management

Log in and select the ASEE 2023 annual conference to set up calls for papers, invite reviewers, update paper status, and more.

THANK YOU!

 

We are delighted that you will be working with us in Baltimore, Maryland and we appreciate all the effort on our behalf.

If you should have any questions please contact us at conferences@asee.org

 

Regards,

The Conferences Team

Important Dates and Deadlines

Expand All

Collapse All

All deadlines occur at Midnight, Eastern Standard Time on the days listed

Monday, October 3, 2022

  • Abstract Submission Open
  • Abstract Reviewer Assignment Open 

Monday, October 31, 2022

  • Author Deadline: Abstract Submission Closed 

Monday, November 7, 2022

  • Session Requests Open
  • Workshop Application Open
  • Topical Plenary Application Open

Monday, November 21, 2022

  • Abstract Accept or Reject Notification to Author Deadline

Monday, December 5, 2022

  • Session Request Deadline
  • Workshop Request Deadline
  • Topical Plenary Application Deadline 

Monday, January 9, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS: Session request approvals by PICs

Tuesday, January 31, 2023

  • AUTHOR DEADLINE: Draft Paper Submission Deadline

Wednesday, February 1, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS: Ticket Information Deadline for Session

Monday, February 6, 2023

  • ALL ATTENDEES: Housing and Registration Open

Tuesday, February 14, 2023

  • REVIEWER DEADLINE: Anonymous Draft Paper Reviews to Program Chair

Tuesday, February 28, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE: Draft Decision Deadline

Tuesday, March 21, 2023

  • AUTHORS: Anonymous Paper with applicable requested revisions: upload deadline


Saturday, April 1, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS:
    • Final paper transfer deadline

Saturday, April 15, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE: Accept/Reject Revised Paper deadline

Sunday, April 30, 2023

  • AUTHOR DEADLINE: 
    • Author Registration Deadline
    • Upload final paper – all Anonymous indicators removed
    • Confirm all co-authors
    • Update all author bios, if applicable
    • Corresponding author indicates who is “presenting”
NO CHANGES of any kind for any papers can be accepted after this date
 

Monday, May 22, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE:
    • Deadline for details for all sessions 
    • All finalized papers assigned to sessions
    • Session and workshop cancellation deadline
    • Sessions not cancelled by this date are final
    • F&B and AV request deadline
    • “Session DONE" Deadline 

June, 2023

  • DEADLINE FOR ALL
    • Attend Annual Conference
    • Complete Surveys 

July, 2023

  • 2024 Division Offer List due

August, 2023

  • 2024 Call for Papers are due
All deadlines occur at Midnight, Eastern Time on the days listed

All deadlines occur at Midnight, Eastern Standard Time on the days listed

Monday, October 3, 2022

  • Abstract Submission Open
  • Abstract Reviewer Assignment Open 

Monday, October 31, 2022

  • Author Deadline: Abstract Submission Closed 

Monday, November 7, 2022

  • Session Requests Open
  • Workshop Application Open
  • Topical Plenary Application Open

Monday, November 21, 2022

  • Abstract Accept or Reject Notification to Author Deadline

Monday, December 5, 2022

  • Session Request Deadline
  • Workshop Request Deadline
  • Topical Plenary Application Deadline 

Monday, January 9, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS: Session request approvals by PICs

Tuesday, January 31, 2023

  • AUTHOR DEADLINE: Draft Paper Submission Deadline

Wednesday, February 1, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS: Ticket Information Deadline for Session

Monday, February 6, 2023

  • ALL ATTENDEES: Housing and Registration Open

Tuesday, February 14, 2023

  • REVIEWER DEADLINE: Anonymous Draft Paper Reviews to Program Chair

Tuesday, February 28, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE: Draft Decision Deadline

Tuesday, March 21, 2023

  • AUTHORS: Anonymous Paper with applicable requested revisions: upload deadline


Saturday, April 1, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIRS:
    • Final paper transfer deadline

Saturday, April 15, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE: Accept/Reject Revised Paper deadline

Sunday, April 30, 2023

  • AUTHOR DEADLINE: 
    • Author Registration Deadline
    • Upload final paper – all Anonymous indicators removed
    • Confirm all co-authors
    • Update all author bios, if applicable
    • Corresponding author indicates who is “presenting”
NO CHANGES of any kind for any papers can be accepted after this date
 

Monday, May 22, 2023

  • PROGRAM CHAIR DEADLINE:
    • Deadline for details for all sessions 
    • All finalized papers assigned to sessions
    • Session and workshop cancellation deadline
    • Sessions not cancelled by this date are final
    • F&B and AV request deadline
    • “Session DONE" Deadline 

June, 2023

  • DEADLINE FOR ALL
    • Attend Annual Conference
    • Complete Surveys 

July, 2023

  • 2024 Division Offer List due

August, 2023

  • 2024 Call for Papers are due
All deadlines occur at Midnight, Eastern Time on the days listed

Program Chair Kit

Download the 2023 Program Chair Kit (DOCX, 2.5 MB) or view by topic below.

Expand All

Collapse All

1.     Uploading attachments

  • Program chairs will have the ability to upload attachments for authors who miss upload deadlines and/or accept late submissions a
  • It is at the discretion of the program chair if you want to accept late or revised abstracts or late or revised draft submission or late or revised paper submissions.
  • The author will need to email you the attachment (either text for abstract or pdf for draft/papers) for you to upload on their behalf.

2.     Paper Designations

  • Reviewers and/or Program Chairs will be able to tag papers for different areas of interest such as Diversity, Research, Best Paper, etc.

3.     Division Session Financials

  • Please note that all session details can be obtained by clicking on the PDF session link to the right of the Manage Sessions page
  • A CSV link is also located to the right of the Manage Sessions page. This CSV will keep a running tally of costs to date on individual events, as well as provide a subtotal for the division.
  • Also available is a CSV and PDF link of the previous year’s conference sessions for your reference.

4.     Works in Progress

  • Authors will have the option of indicating if a work is IN PROGRESS on their abstracts.
  •  Program Chairs: If your division does NOT accept “Works in Progress” please make sure that it is included your Call for Papers

         Be advised: If a Works in Progress abstract is submitted to a division that does not accept this designation, the Program Chair will need to reject the abstract. It is not done automatically by the system.

July & August

  • Create your division’s Call for Papers.
  • Create your division’s reviewer guidelines.
  • Start recruiting reviewers for your division’s submissions.
  • Reviewer lists from last year will be available to access for 2023
  • Talk to the previous chair to see if they have a list of people they have used in the past or contact our membership department (t.manicom@asee.org) and ask for your division’s listserv email address which goes out to your division’s members.

October

  • Abstract submissions open.
  • Invite and assign reviewers to abstracts.
  • Be sure to check submissions often and transfer any papers to other divisions as necessary.
  • Accept transfers from other divisions, and/or accept/reject reviewed abstracts.
  • Start assigning reviewers to abstracts.
  • Abstracts are being reviewed, accepted, rejected, and transferred.

November

  • Workshop, Topical Plenaries & Panel application submissions open.
  • Abstracts are being reviewed, accepted, rejected, and transferred.
  • Abstract notifications are being sent out.
  • Draft papers can be submitted as soon as Abstracts are Accepted.
  • Start assigning reviewers to incoming drafts papers.
  • Check NeMo often as you may be required to transfer papers to other divisions, accept transfers from other divisions and approve and/or reject reviewed drafts.

January

  • PIC meeting takes place at ASEE headquarters.
  • PICs will review all of the division technical sessions, business meetings, and social events.
  • PICs will review the workshop applications, panel presentation applications, as well as the Distinguished Lectures nominations and make their selections.

February

  • Conference Registration opens
  • Draft paper Submission Phase closes.
  • Drafts are being revised, reviewed, accepted, withdrawn, and rejected.

 March – April

  • Authors are paying their registration fees.
  • Titles and description of all sessions are finalized.
  • Best paper nominations to PIC Chairs
  • All Authors are finalizing papers and bios and accepting the Copyright Transfer Agreement

May

  • Final papers are assigned to sessions
  • Confirm that moderators have been assigned to all sessions
  • Session Cancellation Deadline.
  • Division Mixer Participation Deadline.
  • F&B and AV Request Final Deadline.
  • All Program Chairs must confirm that all session details are complete by pushing the “Done” button in NeMo

June

  • Attend conference
  • Complete conference survey (emailed at conclusion of conference)

July

  • Submit new officer list to ASEE HQ

August

  • Submit Division Call for Papers for the next Annual Conference

Visit [link pending] to access Paper Management.

ASEE Members

  • If you are an ASEE member, please contact us for assistance if you are unable to access your account.
  • When you return on subsequent visits, log in with your email address and the password you chose when activating or registering.

 Welcome Page

  • You will be taken to your Welcome Page where you will find “Upcoming Conferences” click on that and then click on 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. You can also edit your personal information, as well as manage conference papers and sessions.

Program Chairs as Reviewers:

  • Please be advised that in order to maintain the double anonymous review process, Program Chairs cannot review papers in their own divisions. 
  • In the event a deadline approaches and your reviews are not complete, your PIC Chair can assist you if absolutely necessary.

Abstracts will only require 1 review

  • Abstracts can be reviewed and accepted as they are submitted. You do not need to wait until the deadline to accept or reject abstracts.
  • As soon as abstracts are accepted, Authors can submit a draft paper. Authors do not have to wait for a submit phase to open.

As mandated by the ASEE Board of Directors, all divisions are publish to present. For a paper to be presented at the Annual Conference or included in the Conference Proceedings, it must pass through the entire review process and be accepted as shown below.

Abstract 

  • Author submits abstract
  • Program Chair assigns reviewers.  You can assign 1 reviewer for an Abstract. In order to move to the draft paper submission phase, you must have one completed review based on the reviewers' comments. Make the determination to either Accept or Reject the Abstract
  • Reviewers read, rank, and comment on abstract
  • Program Chair accepts or rejects abstract

Draft        

  • Author submits draft
  • Program Chair assigns 3 reviewers
  • Reviewers read, rank, and comment on paper
  • Program Chair receives reviewers requested revisions, consolidates revisions and sends them to Author if applicable
  • Program Chair accepts/rejects papers and revised papers

Register  

  • Author pays registration fee

Ready to Publish             

  • Author submits final paper
  • Author finalizes all bios and co-authors, etc.

Final requirements

After a final paper has been accepted by the program chair, the following requirements must be met for it to be presented at a conference, and placed in the final program and proceedings:

  • One author must register for the conference.
  • The authors must transfer the copyright for the paper to ASEE.

All papers must have at least 1 author registered by Mon. April 8, 2023.  After this date registrations are final and cannot be refunded without the paper being withdrawn.

If the conference registration is subsequently refunded, the paper will not be placed in a session, will not be presented at the conference, and will not appear in the final program and proceedings.

For all conferences, including ASEE-affiliated conferences, a paper that is published at one conference will not be automatically accepted for another ASEE conference.  All papers for other conferences must be reviewed and accepted based on that conference’s criteria.

This does not include papers explicitly labeled as “reprints” as would be the case for best paper competitions, etc.

As the program chair, you can view all papers submitted to your division. You will see all papers you need to act on and overall statistics for your division.

The list of papers is organized so that papers requiring your attention or action are at the top of the list.

As program chair, you can expect to see the following status messages:

 

Transfer requested

Another program chair has asked to transfer this paper to your division

Assign reviews

The submitted abstract or draft needs reviewers assigned to it

Await reviews

The reviews are assigned but not finished

Abstract decision

The abstract has been reviewed: accept or reject it

Await draft

The abstract was accepted but the author has not yet submitted a draft

Draft Decision

The draft has been reviewed and can be accepted or rejected. If reviewers have asked for revisions the paper can also be sent back for revisions

Await revision

Revisions to the draft were requested by the reviewers, Program chair consolidates revision requests and

sends them to author

Revision Decision

Paper has been re-evaluated by the reviewer and is awaiting accept/reject from the Program Chair]

Await payment

The draft final was accepted but the author has not paid for registration


 Accepted

The final draft has been accepted but registration has not been paid and copyright needs to be accepted, etc.

Ready to Publish

The accepted paper has a paid registration and is ready to be assigned to a session

Withdrawn

The author has chosen to withdraw the submission

Rejected

The abstract or draft was rejected

Past deadline

The paper has missed a deadline and is invalid

Session Requests

Program chairs are responsible for requesting their divisions’ sessions at the Annual

Conference, including:

  • Business Meetings
  • Social functions
  • Sunday workshops Application
  • Topical Plenaries Application
  • Panel Sessions
  • Special Sessions

The following types of sessions will be pre-assigned based on the historical ratio of Abstracts

  • Submitted vs. Papers Published for each individual division.
  • Technical sessions
  • Poster Session (1 per division)

Please be advised that session requests are only requests. While the program committee attempts to allocate time and space to each division fairly, not all request can be accommodated. We recommend that you do not publicize sessions or invite speakers for specific time slots until you have received final approval and session time assignments from ASEE headquarters.

Any event not requested online will not be approved by the program committee and will not be held at the annual conference. You will receive the session approvals by late January .

 

Scheduling

Based on the number of abstracts received and attendance at past years’ sessions, each division will be automatically allotted a certain number of concurrent sessions. Some divisions may be assigned only one session in each time slot, other divisions are allotted more.

  • The ASEE Divisions Poster session will be held during the Focus on Exhibits Networking Session on Tuesday from 9:15 am – 10:45 am
  • Topical Plenaries will be held on Wednesday morning at 8:00 am 
  • The NSF Grantees Poster sessions will be held during the Focus on Exhibits Networking Session on Wednesday morning from 9:15 am – 10:45 am

When you request sessions through the online application, it will provide you with all available options based on the type of session and your division’s allotment of session codes.

  • Technical Sessions will be pre-assigned to divisions based on the historical ratio of a Abstracts Submitted vs. Papers Published per individual division, including timeslots, (data collected the last 12 years).
  • Divisions will be able to request Business Meetings, Social Functions, Workshops, Topical Plenaries, Panel Presentations and Special Sessions the same way they’ve been done in the past.
  • You can view your division statistics in the “division” tab in manage sessions.
  • All Divisions that accept papers will be assigned one (1) Poster Session. This session can be cancelled in April if your Division does not need one.
  • Panel Sessions: Divisions can request as many panel sessions as they like.
  • All panels should be requested during the session request phase in NeMo
  • Be advised that finalized papers can now also be assigned to Panel Sessions in addition to Technical Sessions
  • Special Sessions
  • Program chairs have the option of creating “special sessions” that can be used for roundtables, town halls, lightning sessions, postcard sessions, etc., Be sure to indicate your preferred “room set” when submitting a special session request

 

Ticketing Information

Sessions that are ticketed require attendees to obtain a ticket in advance to attend the session. Tickets can have a price or be free.

PLEASE NOTE you must make a session a ticketed event:        

  • If you plan to serve a meal at a division event, such as breakfast, lunch and dinner (sessions that are receptions or are just serving refreshment breaks, do not require a ticket)
  • You want a roster of attendees
  • You need an exact count for your session
  • Your session requires a fee

 If ticket pricing is not received for any of the above referenced sessions, by the deadline, ASEE will make your ticket price $0.00

 

Technical Sessions

  • Once papers are finalized, they should be assigned to sessions. This can be done by clicking on Managing Sessions, clicking on the individual session link and then clicking on the assign paper link.
  • Once papers are assigned, they can be put in the order in which you would like to have them presented.

 

 

Assign Moderators

  • Once finalized papers have been assigned to sessions, a moderator must be assigned to each technical session
  • Moderators will be sent an email notification when they are assigned.
  • Be advised: You will be notified if a moderator rejects your request. In which case you will have to assign someone else.
  • Moderators will have access to session information such as author names and contact information, the pdf of the papers, etc.
  • Moderators can access this information by logging into www.asee.org, clicking on upcoming conferences, clicking on 2023 Annual, and then click on Moderator Sessions.

 

Food & Beverage

 

  • Guarantees – when ordering F&B please indicate if you want a specific amount or if you want ASEE HQ to guarantee based on the number of people attending. Be advised that the division will be responsible for whatever amount is ordered/and or guaranteed.
  • There will be a check box to select when you pick your menu item to indicate which method you prefer
  • Menus are provided for each venue that will have sessions where there will be catering.
  • Program chairs can review menu prices starting in September
  • As soon as sessions are approved and assigned to space (late January) you will be able to select the desired food and beverage for your sessions
  • You can do this by clicking on the individual session and then clicking on the amenities tab
  • All food and beverage must be finalized by the May 21 deadline

 

Session Notes

You can add any special session notes for HQ reference in the text box in the Amenities Section under Manager Sessions

 

Special Requests

Be advised that all special requests for set-up, etc. should be added in the requests text box.

 

Finalizing Sessions

  • All sessions must be finalized by the May 21 deadlne. Finalizing a session includes the following:
  • Update all session titles and descriptions
  • Finalize all F&B orders
  • Finalize any Special AV or Internet Orders
  • Assign papers to technical sessions and put in preferred order
  • Assign a Moderator to each technical session and each Panel Session.

You can see an example of a session sets here: (link to room sets on web)

 

All Technical Sessions

  • All Technical Sessions will be set theater with head table for 4 on riser next to podium and mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Each meeting room will be set with a screen, projector, podium and mic
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Business Meetings

  • All business meetings will be set U-shape where applicable and/or available (for large business meetings that require a meal, those sessions will be placed in rooms that are set with banquet rounds).
  • All business meetings will be set with podium, mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Each business meeting room will have an LCD projector, screen and podium ad mic
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Social Events 

  • Social Events will receive a podium and mic and be set either reception style or banquet style depending on the type of event.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Panel Sessions 

  • All Panel Sessions will be set theater with head table for 4 with 2 tables mics on riser next to podium and mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Special Sessions

  • Special Sessions will be set according to the preference indicated by the program chair.
  • Depending on the type of room, the above default AV will be provided
  • Different sets and additional AV will incur a fee and can be added in the manage paper section per the above instructions

 

Offsite Events

  • As program chair, you are responsible for indicating the location of any offsite event and the process attendees will need to sign up for that offsite event.
  • ASEE can list an offsite event in the program guide and can collect ticket revenue for you.
  • Ticket revenue will be credited to the department BASS account
  • ASEE HQ can assist you in locating a venue and arranging payment for you. Please send an email with request and details to conferences@asee.org

 

“Bill To”

  • All costs incurred for division events will be charged either to the Division Operating and/or BASS account at the conclusion of the conference.
  • If a session is incurring a cost and that cost is covered by an outside entity, be sure to note that I the comments section of that session so that costs are allocated accordingly.

 

Division Session Financials

  • Please note that all session details can be obtained by clicking on the PDF session link to the right of the Manage Sessions page
  • A CSV link is also located to the right of the Manage Sessions page. This CSV will keep a running tally of costs to date on individual events as well as provide a subtotal for the division.
  • Also available is a CSV and PDF link of the previous year’s conference sessions for your convenience
  • Please note that sessions that have indicated an alternate “Bill To” funding source will not be available on these links.

 

Sunday Workshop Financials

  • BE ADVISED: All workshops not organized directly by the division must be paid in full by Friday, June 8, in advance of the Annual Conference or the workshop will not be permitted to be conducted on site.
  • Invoices and payment instructions will be provided to all Workshop Organizers directly

 

Sponsoring Sessions/Splitting Session Costs

If you plan to co-host an event with another division and split the cost, please note the percentage or dollar figure when sending the co-sponsor request.

 

Workshop Sets

  • All SundayWorkshops will be set classroom style with a head table for 4 on a riser with podium.
  • All expenses incurred, such as a different set, any additional AV or any F&B is the responsibility of the workshop organizer and must be requested on the application

As soon as the paper system opens, you want to create a pool of reviewers to review the abstracts and drafts for your division. Previous year’s division reviewers will be available for your use

You can invite your division’s reviewers by clicking on Reviewers on the right side of the main paper management screen.

Note: All reviews (abstracts and draft papers) are done in “double Anonymous” (meaning that the author does not know who the reviewers are and the reviewers do not know who the authors). Note: Program Chairs cannot be reviewers of abstracts or draft papers within their own division.

From the Reviewers page, you can view your division’s current reviewer roster, remove reviewers, and see the status of each reviewer’s reviews. You can also download reports with information on the reviewers and the status of their reviews.

From the Invite another reviewer page, you can add a reviewer in two ways: by searching through ASEE‟s membership or by providing the reviewer’s email address. When you invite a reviewer, they receive an email with instructions for logging in or creating an ASEE account. They have to log in and accept the invitation to be a reviewer before you can assign them any reviews. Reviewers can also decline the request. You will receive notification either way.

 

Reviewer Name

School

Reviewer Name

School

 

 

Reviewer Name

School

 

 

Assigning Abstract Reviews

Abstracts submitted to your division appear on the main paper management screen with the status assign reviews. Click on the paper’s title to view its details page.

On the abstract’s details page, you can scroll down to preview or download the abstract. If the abstract does not fit your division, consider contacting the program chair of a more relevant division and asking if he or she would accept the abstract. If so, select the division’s name under Transfer this abstract and press Transfer. The Program Chair that the abstract is transferred to will either allow or deny the abstract to their division.

If the abstract does fit your division, you can assign reviewers for it. Select a reviewer from the dropdown list in the Reviews section and press Assign review.

After assigning a reviewer, you can continue to add other reviewers. Only 1 review per abstract is necessary, remind reviewers when a deadline is approaching, or remove a reviewer.

Once you have assigned reviewers for this abstract, its status changes to Awaiting reviews and it moves lower in the list of papers on the main paper management screen.

 

Abstract Decision

When the review is complete, the paper’s status changes to Abstract Decision and will move to the top of the list.

On the abstract’s details page, you can now view the rankings and comments provided by reviewers, compose comments to the abstract’s author, and decide to accept or reject it.

If the abstract is accepted then the abstract’s status changes to Awaiting draft until the author reviews your comments and uploads a draft version.

 

 

Assigning Draft Reviews

When the author submits a draft, the paper’s status changes to assign reviews and its phase changes from abstract to paper. On the paper’s details page you can assign, remove and browse reviews just as you did for the abstract. The paper’s status changes to Await reviews until the draft reviews are complete. These reviews are handled in the same manner as abstract reviews with the exception of being able to be nominated for best paper and the reviewer can also recommend the draft be accepted with changes, as well as accepted or rejected.

 

Draft Decision

When the reviews are finished, the paper’s status changes to Draft Decision and moves to the top of your list of papers. The draft’s details page provides access to all reviews and allows you to compose comments to the author and accept or reject the paper as is or consolidate the reviewers comments and request revisions from the author.

Drafts that are accepted as is have a status of  Await Final

Drafts that require revision will have the status of  Await Draft Revisions.

When the author has uploaded the final version of an accepted draft the state will appear as

Accepted until they have paid the registration fee and accepted the copyright.

Once the author completes those steps the paper will have a status of  Process Complete.

When a paper has major content revisions requested and the author uploads those revisions, the status changes to  Review Revisions.

PLEASE BE ADVISED that Reviewers need to confirm that revisions were made to the paper and then send the Program Chair recommendations to accept or reject.

Reviewers are automatically assigned to a draft revision when it is uploaded.

The details page allows you to accept or reject all revised papers. 

An accepted draft revision will have a status of  Accepted and the author will be asked to pay the registration fee and accept copyright.

If a reviewer recommends a draft to be “accepted,” the reviewer will be asked to rank the paper by using the below matrix. This will assist in the ranking for Best Paper, as well as assist program chairs with the accept/reject decisions.

BE ADVISED: ranking the paper using the rubric is optional for reviewers.

Your final task in regards to papers is to nominate the best papers from your division. Each division may select up to 10% of its papers as best papers, but only one best paper per division may be submitted to the division PIC for consideration in the PIC Best Paper competition.

Each row is to be scored independently from zero to three points.

 

 

3-Excellent

2- Good

1 - Satisfactory

0 – Needs Improvement

CONTENT

Originality

Content contains highly original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Content contains some original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic

Content contains moderately original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Content contains minimal original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Research Approach

The research approach is novel and/or sophisticated and appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific).

The research approach is advanced and appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific)

The research approach is basic, but still appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific).

The research approach is inadequate and/or not appropriate for the purpose of the paper.

Results

Data collection and assessment results are very clear and logical, strongly supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results are clear and logical, supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results are somewhat clear and logical, moderately supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results need improvement.

Scholarship

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a significant extent.

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a moderate extent.

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a limited extent.

Content does not review and build on appropriate prior work.

Relevance

The paper makes a highly significant contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a significant contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a moderate contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a minimal contribution to the field of engineering education.

FOCUS

Goals

The goals are strongly developed and explicitly stated

The goals are developed and explicitly stated.

The goals are not fully developed and/or stated.

The goals are not developed and/or stated

Order

The order in which ideas are presented is explicitly and consistently clear, logical and effective.

The order in which ideas are presented is reasonably clear, logical and effective, but could be improved

The order in which ideas are presented is occasionally confusing.

There is little apparent structure to the flow of ideas, causing confusion.

Conclusions

The conclusions are very well formulated and are strongly supported by the data.

The conclusions are well formulated and are supported by the data.

The conclusions are moderately effective and are only partially supported by the data.

The conclusions are minimally effective and do not appear to be supported by the data

LANGUAGE

Style

The paper is clear, concise, and consistent. It is easily understandable and a pleasure to read.

The paper is mostly understandable, with occasional inconsistencies that could be improved

Multiple sections of the paper are difficult to read/understand. The paper could be better structured or more clearly explained

The paper is difficult to read/understand due to sentence/paragraph structure, word choices, lack of explanations, etc.

Mechanics

The writing is near perfect with little to no grammar or spelling errors.

Minor grammar or spelling errors are present, but do not detract from the content. Content is clear

Some grammar or spelling errors are significant and detract from the content. Paper requires further editing.

Pervasive grammar or spelling errors distort meaning and make reading difficult.

Each Author who submits an abstract to the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition is responsible for:

  • Reading the information and following the instructions within the Author's Kit throughout every step of their submission
  • Submitting a plain text abstract in the designated text box
  • Acknowledging the plagiarism policy
  • Acknowledging the copyright policy
  • Submit the draft and final paper directly through the paper management system as a PDF ONLY
  • Checking the PDF in the Paper Management System after each submission of their abstract and paper to ensure that the file transmitted properly
  • Meeting all deadlines for uploads and registration fees
  • Making sure that their co-authors are properly added on their submission
  • Contacting ASEE staff at conferences@asee.org  if there is a problem with their submission or account
  • Contacting the program chair with any issues concerning the content of their paper or their session assignment.  
  • Assigning someone to make their submission and/or payment for them if they are not available to do so themselves (be sure to provide that person with all necessary account information to do so)
  • Indicating who will be presenting the paper on site
  • Acknowledge that if a paper only has one author registered, and that author cancels their registration, their paper will be withdrawn

  • Session moderators play an important role in the smooth operation of any conference. Only people with experience as a presenter and only someone with a personality of sufficient strength should be selected for this role.
  • Moderators should familiarize themselves with the pronunciation of the names of their speakers prior to the session.
  • Moderators should make it clear to the speakers that the session time belongs to the moderator, and that no one is “entitled” to any amount not granted.
  • Moderators should communicate with the presenters at least 2 weeks prior to the conference, relaying time limits, equipment limitations, room location and pre-presentation expectations to the speakers.
  • Moderators should enforce time limits with agreed symbols to the presenters, i.e. standing with 1 minute left to go, holding up a placard , etc. All this should be communicated prior to the session start.
  • Moderators should control the asking and answering of questions, with questioners required to identify themselves and their affiliation.
  • Moderators should protect student speakers from grandstanding or adversarial questioners.
  • Moderators should arrive at the end of the previous session and ascertain that the AV equipment is functional. If a common computer is mandated, it should be set up with presentations pre-loaded.
  • The session moderator is an active participant in the proceedings, not a bored bystander reading names of talks.

Policy on Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication

American Society for Engineering Education

May 31, 2013; Revised October 2, 2014

Preamble

The American Society for Engineering Education serves the engineering and technology communities by offering professional conferences, networking opportunities, and support of research in the various fields of engineering and technology related to education. Research is disseminated to the wider community via the organization’s professional publications. ASEE subscribes to the highest standards of ethical conduct, as detailed in the “ASEE Statement on Engineering Ethics Education,” located on the society’s website at http://www.asee.org/about-us/the-organization/our-board-of-directors/asee-board-of-directors-statements/engineering-ethics-education

In scholarly publication, plagiarism occurs when an author copies the words, illustrations, and ideas of others without identifying the sources. Plagiarism is unethical because it represents the theft of the intellectual work of others, and the subsequent misrepresentation of that work as the author’s own. An act of plagiarism not only violates intellectual property rights but is anathema to the principle of academic integrity, which is fundamental for scholarly research, writing, and publication. Inadvertent publication of plagiarized material can undermine the quality of a journal or proceedings.

When authors copy not from others but from themselves, by publishing the same article in multiple journals, the practice is called redundant or duplicate publication. Compared with plagiarism, duplicate publication is generally considered less serious, but it is still unethical. (The only exception is when reprinting has been appropriately approved and permission obtained from the original copyright holder; e.g., a keynote speech that has also been published.) Duplicate publication of the same article wastes space in journals and time of reviewers. Duplicate publication misrepresents the author’s record of scholarly contributions, and it corrupts meta-analyses of multiple studies on the same subject.

This policy outlines the steps that ASEE will take in response to allegations of plagiarism and duplicate publication involving articles published in or submitted to ASEE journals, magazines, and conference proceedings, including the annual conference, section and zone meetings, and the global colloquium.

Definitions and Scope

  1. The original paper is the paper or source from which the words and ideas were copied. The second paper is the paper in which the copied text later appears. This policy applies both when the second paper is a submitted manuscript and when the second paper has appeared in print.
  2. This policy applies when either the original paper or the second paper has appeared in an ASEE publication, or when the second paper has been submitted to an ASEE publication.
  3. In this policy, the author is the author of the second paper. The policy applies with equal force to all co-authors of the second paper.
  4. Plagiarism occurs when the second paper copies a significant amount of text from the original paper without proper citation of the source (e.g., beyond “fair use” in copyright law). For this policy, plagiarism requires that the copying be either verbatim or nearly verbatim (with minor insignificant changes) without citing the original source. Whereas other definitions of plagiarism include close paraphrasing from an unattributed source, the strict definition in this policy enables editors to focus on the clearest cases, without expending effort to evaluate whether an instance of paraphrasing constitutes plagiarism. Note that citations are not required for ideas that are well known within the field of the paper.  
  5. Duplicate publication occurs when at least one author is in common between the original paper and the second paper.
  6. For this policy, to qualify as a case of duplicate publication, the original paper must be an article in a peer-reviewed journal or peer-reviewed conference proceedings. When the original paper is on an unreviewed website or in an unreviewed conference proceedings, the submission or publication of the second paper is not considered duplicate publication; however, the author must notify the journal editor at time of submission as to where and when the paper was originally published. When the author republishes an original ASEE conference paper in a journal, the author or the journal first must secure a copyright release from ASEE, and the second paper must identify the original source.
  7. The Editor-in-Chief of an ASEE publication is the editor who has ultimate responsibility for that publication. For an ASEE conference proceedings, the overall conference chair fulfills that role.

Procedure

  1. An allegation of plagiarism or duplicate publication must be made by the initiator—who might be either a reviewer or reader—in writing. The allegation must include all relevant evidence, such as the original sources, and must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief of the appropriate ASEE publication.
  2. Within 14 calendar days, the Editor-in-Chief will review the allegation. If the Editor-in-Chief concurs that the allegation represents a potential instance of plagiarism or serious duplicate publication, the Editor-in-Chief will refer the allegation to an ad hoc investigation committee. If the Editor-in-Chief and the Executive Director of ASEE agree that the allegation represents duplicate publication of substantially less than 50% of the original or second paper, the Editor-in-Chief will request a correction from the author; if the author does not respond in writing within 30 calendar days, this process will continue. 
  3. The ad hoc investigation committee will be appointed by the Executive Director of ASEE. That committee will include an editor or associate editor from an ASEE publication who is not involved with the allegation and three other appropriate members whose expertise includes the subject matter of the papers named in the allegation. 
  4. The investigation committee will evaluate the written evidence and report its findings to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days. If the committee finds clear and convincing evidence that plagiarism or duplicate publication has occurred, the report will recommend an appropriate sanction (see below).
  5. If the allegation is not dismissed, the Editor-in-Chief will immediately forward the investigation committee’s report to each author of the second paper, inviting each to respond in writing within 30 days. The Editor-in-Chief may ask each author to describe the various roles of each co-author concerning the incident.
  6. Within 14 days of receiving all of the authors’ responses, or after the 30 day response period has elapsed, the Editor-in-Chief will decide to either accept the recommended sanction or modify it as appropriate. The Editor-in-Chief will deliver the decision to the author, co-authors, and the investigation committee in writing.
  7. If the second paper has multiple authors, the Editor-in-Chief may choose different sanctions for different authors, depending on their roles in the preparation of the second paper.
  8. For each author who is at an academic institution, the Editor-in-Chief will send copies of the evidence, the investigation committee’s report, and the sanction notification to the research integrity officer (RIO) of the author’s institution. If the institution has no RIO, the Editor-in-Chief will notify the institution’s academic vice president or equivalent administrator.
  9. The author may appeal the decision of the Editor-in-Chief to the Executive Director of ASEE, in writing, within 30 days. Upon reviewing the evidence, the Executive Director may reduce the severity of the sanction, but may not increase the sanction. The Executive Director will then convey the decision on the appeal to the author and the institution’s RIO. The Executive Director’s decision is final. 

Sanctions

 

  1. Extensive cases. A plagiarism case is considered extensive if more than 50% of the original paper is plagiarized, or more than 50% of the second paper represents plagiarized material. In this case, all of the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals and conferences will be immediately rejected. In addition, the author will be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for three to five years. If the second paper appeared in an ASEE journal or conference, a notice of plagiarism will be printed where appropriate.
  2. Serious cases. A plagiarism case is considered serious if a substantial amount of either the original paper or the second paper is plagiarized. A duplicate publication case is serious if more than 50% of the original or second paper represents duplicated material. In this case, all of the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals and conferences will be immediately rejected. In addition, the author will be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for one to three years. If the second paper appeared in an ASEE journal or conference, a notice of plagiarism or duplicate publication will be printed where appropriate.
  3. Significant cases. A case of plagiarism is considered significant if 300 or more consecutive words are copied verbatim or nearly verbatim. A duplicate publication case is significant if a substantial amount of the original or second paper represents duplicated material. In this case, the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals or conferences may be rejected. In addition, the author may be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for at most one year.

Additional Policies

 

  1. Confidentiality. The Editor-in-Chief and others involved in carrying out this policy will maintain the confidentiality of the identities of the initiator and the author, and the confidentiality of all correspondence regarding the case and its disposition.
  2. Conflict of interest. All editors who have a conflict of interest with the author or the author’s institution will recuse themselves from this process.
  3. Diversity. The Editor-in-Chief and others who carry out this policy will respect cultural differences in citation practices by different scholarly communities and academic disciplines.
  4. Non-retaliation. If the initiator has brought the allegation in good faith, then there should be no retaliation against the initiator.
  5. Records. After a finding of plagiarism or duplicate publication, if the second paper has appeared in an ASEE journal or conference proceedings, then the electronic version of the paper will be permanently marked as plagiarized or duplicated, and a reference to the source will be included.

Modifications. Minor modifications in this policy may be made at the discretion of the Executive Director of ASEE. For example, the Executive Director may extend a time period for good reasons, or appoint a substitute for the Editor-in-Chief in a case of conflict of interest.

ASEE ANNUAL CONFERENCE & EXPOSITION 

COPYRIGHT TRANSFER FORM

 

 

 

Title of Paper: ________________________________________________________________________

 

Author(s): ______ _____________________________________________________________________

 

Publication: ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings                           Session #: ___________

 

 

 

 

PART A

The undersigned, desiring to publish the above paper in a publication of ASEE or co-sponsored by ASEE, hereby transfers their copyrights in the above paper to the American Society for Engineering Education, known as ASEE. 

 

In return for these rights, ASEE hereby grants the above author(s), and the employers for whom the work was performed, permission to:

-- Reuse portions of the above paper in other works.

-- Reproduce the above paper for personal or internal use, provided that (a) the source and ASEE copyright are indicated, (b) the copies are not used in a way that implies ASEE endorsement of product or service of an employer, and (c) the copies are not offered for sale.

 

In exercising its rights under copyright, ASEE requires that:

-- The consent of the first-named author is sought as a condition in granting republication permission by others.

-- The consent of the authors or their employers be obtained as a condition in granting permission to others to reuse a portion or all of the paper for promotion or marketing purposes.

 

Name: _________________________________       Title: ________________________________

 

Signature: __________________________________ (if not author, then relationship to author)

 

Employer: ___________________________________                       Date Form Signed: ______________

 

 

 

PART B

(For U.S. Government Employees Only)

This will certify that all authors of the above paper are employees of the U.S. Government and performed this work as part of their employment.

 

Name: _________________________________       Title:  ______________________________

 

Signature: __________________________________ (if not author, then relationship to author)

 

Govt. Organization: _________________________________ Date Form Signed: ____________

1.     Uploading attachments

  • Program chairs will have the ability to upload attachments for authors who miss upload deadlines and/or accept late submissions a
  • It is at the discretion of the program chair if you want to accept late or revised abstracts or late or revised draft submission or late or revised paper submissions.
  • The author will need to email you the attachment (either text for abstract or pdf for draft/papers) for you to upload on their behalf.

2.     Paper Designations

  • Reviewers and/or Program Chairs will be able to tag papers for different areas of interest such as Diversity, Research, Best Paper, etc.

3.     Division Session Financials

  • Please note that all session details can be obtained by clicking on the PDF session link to the right of the Manage Sessions page
  • A CSV link is also located to the right of the Manage Sessions page. This CSV will keep a running tally of costs to date on individual events, as well as provide a subtotal for the division.
  • Also available is a CSV and PDF link of the previous year’s conference sessions for your reference.

4.     Works in Progress

  • Authors will have the option of indicating if a work is IN PROGRESS on their abstracts.
  •  Program Chairs: If your division does NOT accept “Works in Progress” please make sure that it is included your Call for Papers

         Be advised: If a Works in Progress abstract is submitted to a division that does not accept this designation, the Program Chair will need to reject the abstract. It is not done automatically by the system.

July & August

  • Create your division’s Call for Papers.
  • Create your division’s reviewer guidelines.
  • Start recruiting reviewers for your division’s submissions.
  • Reviewer lists from last year will be available to access for 2023
  • Talk to the previous chair to see if they have a list of people they have used in the past or contact our membership department (t.manicom@asee.org) and ask for your division’s listserv email address which goes out to your division’s members.

October

  • Abstract submissions open.
  • Invite and assign reviewers to abstracts.
  • Be sure to check submissions often and transfer any papers to other divisions as necessary.
  • Accept transfers from other divisions, and/or accept/reject reviewed abstracts.
  • Start assigning reviewers to abstracts.
  • Abstracts are being reviewed, accepted, rejected, and transferred.

November

  • Workshop, Topical Plenaries & Panel application submissions open.
  • Abstracts are being reviewed, accepted, rejected, and transferred.
  • Abstract notifications are being sent out.
  • Draft papers can be submitted as soon as Abstracts are Accepted.
  • Start assigning reviewers to incoming drafts papers.
  • Check NeMo often as you may be required to transfer papers to other divisions, accept transfers from other divisions and approve and/or reject reviewed drafts.

January

  • PIC meeting takes place at ASEE headquarters.
  • PICs will review all of the division technical sessions, business meetings, and social events.
  • PICs will review the workshop applications, panel presentation applications, as well as the Distinguished Lectures nominations and make their selections.

February

  • Conference Registration opens
  • Draft paper Submission Phase closes.
  • Drafts are being revised, reviewed, accepted, withdrawn, and rejected.

 March – April

  • Authors are paying their registration fees.
  • Titles and description of all sessions are finalized.
  • Best paper nominations to PIC Chairs
  • All Authors are finalizing papers and bios and accepting the Copyright Transfer Agreement

May

  • Final papers are assigned to sessions
  • Confirm that moderators have been assigned to all sessions
  • Session Cancellation Deadline.
  • Division Mixer Participation Deadline.
  • F&B and AV Request Final Deadline.
  • All Program Chairs must confirm that all session details are complete by pushing the “Done” button in NeMo

June

  • Attend conference
  • Complete conference survey (emailed at conclusion of conference)

July

  • Submit new officer list to ASEE HQ

August

  • Submit Division Call for Papers for the next Annual Conference

Visit [link pending] to access Paper Management.

ASEE Members

  • If you are an ASEE member, please contact us for assistance if you are unable to access your account.
  • When you return on subsequent visits, log in with your email address and the password you chose when activating or registering.

 Welcome Page

  • You will be taken to your Welcome Page where you will find “Upcoming Conferences” click on that and then click on 2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition. You can also edit your personal information, as well as manage conference papers and sessions.

Program Chairs as Reviewers:

  • Please be advised that in order to maintain the double anonymous review process, Program Chairs cannot review papers in their own divisions. 
  • In the event a deadline approaches and your reviews are not complete, your PIC Chair can assist you if absolutely necessary.

Abstracts will only require 1 review

  • Abstracts can be reviewed and accepted as they are submitted. You do not need to wait until the deadline to accept or reject abstracts.
  • As soon as abstracts are accepted, Authors can submit a draft paper. Authors do not have to wait for a submit phase to open.

As mandated by the ASEE Board of Directors, all divisions are publish to present. For a paper to be presented at the Annual Conference or included in the Conference Proceedings, it must pass through the entire review process and be accepted as shown below.

Abstract 

  • Author submits abstract
  • Program Chair assigns reviewers.  You can assign 1 reviewer for an Abstract. In order to move to the draft paper submission phase, you must have one completed review based on the reviewers' comments. Make the determination to either Accept or Reject the Abstract
  • Reviewers read, rank, and comment on abstract
  • Program Chair accepts or rejects abstract

Draft        

  • Author submits draft
  • Program Chair assigns 3 reviewers
  • Reviewers read, rank, and comment on paper
  • Program Chair receives reviewers requested revisions, consolidates revisions and sends them to Author if applicable
  • Program Chair accepts/rejects papers and revised papers

Register  

  • Author pays registration fee

Ready to Publish             

  • Author submits final paper
  • Author finalizes all bios and co-authors, etc.

Final requirements

After a final paper has been accepted by the program chair, the following requirements must be met for it to be presented at a conference, and placed in the final program and proceedings:

  • One author must register for the conference.
  • The authors must transfer the copyright for the paper to ASEE.

All papers must have at least 1 author registered by Mon. April 8, 2023.  After this date registrations are final and cannot be refunded without the paper being withdrawn.

If the conference registration is subsequently refunded, the paper will not be placed in a session, will not be presented at the conference, and will not appear in the final program and proceedings.

For all conferences, including ASEE-affiliated conferences, a paper that is published at one conference will not be automatically accepted for another ASEE conference.  All papers for other conferences must be reviewed and accepted based on that conference’s criteria.

This does not include papers explicitly labeled as “reprints” as would be the case for best paper competitions, etc.

As the program chair, you can view all papers submitted to your division. You will see all papers you need to act on and overall statistics for your division.

The list of papers is organized so that papers requiring your attention or action are at the top of the list.

As program chair, you can expect to see the following status messages:

 

Transfer requested

Another program chair has asked to transfer this paper to your division

Assign reviews

The submitted abstract or draft needs reviewers assigned to it

Await reviews

The reviews are assigned but not finished

Abstract decision

The abstract has been reviewed: accept or reject it

Await draft

The abstract was accepted but the author has not yet submitted a draft

Draft Decision

The draft has been reviewed and can be accepted or rejected. If reviewers have asked for revisions the paper can also be sent back for revisions

Await revision

Revisions to the draft were requested by the reviewers, Program chair consolidates revision requests and

sends them to author

Revision Decision

Paper has been re-evaluated by the reviewer and is awaiting accept/reject from the Program Chair]

Await payment

The draft final was accepted but the author has not paid for registration


 Accepted

The final draft has been accepted but registration has not been paid and copyright needs to be accepted, etc.

Ready to Publish

The accepted paper has a paid registration and is ready to be assigned to a session

Withdrawn

The author has chosen to withdraw the submission

Rejected

The abstract or draft was rejected

Past deadline

The paper has missed a deadline and is invalid

Session Requests

Program chairs are responsible for requesting their divisions’ sessions at the Annual

Conference, including:

  • Business Meetings
  • Social functions
  • Sunday workshops Application
  • Topical Plenaries Application
  • Panel Sessions
  • Special Sessions

The following types of sessions will be pre-assigned based on the historical ratio of Abstracts

  • Submitted vs. Papers Published for each individual division.
  • Technical sessions
  • Poster Session (1 per division)

Please be advised that session requests are only requests. While the program committee attempts to allocate time and space to each division fairly, not all request can be accommodated. We recommend that you do not publicize sessions or invite speakers for specific time slots until you have received final approval and session time assignments from ASEE headquarters.

Any event not requested online will not be approved by the program committee and will not be held at the annual conference. You will receive the session approvals by late January .

 

Scheduling

Based on the number of abstracts received and attendance at past years’ sessions, each division will be automatically allotted a certain number of concurrent sessions. Some divisions may be assigned only one session in each time slot, other divisions are allotted more.

  • The ASEE Divisions Poster session will be held during the Focus on Exhibits Networking Session on Tuesday from 9:15 am – 10:45 am
  • Topical Plenaries will be held on Wednesday morning at 8:00 am 
  • The NSF Grantees Poster sessions will be held during the Focus on Exhibits Networking Session on Wednesday morning from 9:15 am – 10:45 am

When you request sessions through the online application, it will provide you with all available options based on the type of session and your division’s allotment of session codes.

  • Technical Sessions will be pre-assigned to divisions based on the historical ratio of a Abstracts Submitted vs. Papers Published per individual division, including timeslots, (data collected the last 12 years).
  • Divisions will be able to request Business Meetings, Social Functions, Workshops, Topical Plenaries, Panel Presentations and Special Sessions the same way they’ve been done in the past.
  • You can view your division statistics in the “division” tab in manage sessions.
  • All Divisions that accept papers will be assigned one (1) Poster Session. This session can be cancelled in April if your Division does not need one.
  • Panel Sessions: Divisions can request as many panel sessions as they like.
  • All panels should be requested during the session request phase in NeMo
  • Be advised that finalized papers can now also be assigned to Panel Sessions in addition to Technical Sessions
  • Special Sessions
  • Program chairs have the option of creating “special sessions” that can be used for roundtables, town halls, lightning sessions, postcard sessions, etc., Be sure to indicate your preferred “room set” when submitting a special session request

 

Ticketing Information

Sessions that are ticketed require attendees to obtain a ticket in advance to attend the session. Tickets can have a price or be free.

PLEASE NOTE you must make a session a ticketed event:        

  • If you plan to serve a meal at a division event, such as breakfast, lunch and dinner (sessions that are receptions or are just serving refreshment breaks, do not require a ticket)
  • You want a roster of attendees
  • You need an exact count for your session
  • Your session requires a fee

 If ticket pricing is not received for any of the above referenced sessions, by the deadline, ASEE will make your ticket price $0.00

 

Technical Sessions

  • Once papers are finalized, they should be assigned to sessions. This can be done by clicking on Managing Sessions, clicking on the individual session link and then clicking on the assign paper link.
  • Once papers are assigned, they can be put in the order in which you would like to have them presented.

 

 

Assign Moderators

  • Once finalized papers have been assigned to sessions, a moderator must be assigned to each technical session
  • Moderators will be sent an email notification when they are assigned.
  • Be advised: You will be notified if a moderator rejects your request. In which case you will have to assign someone else.
  • Moderators will have access to session information such as author names and contact information, the pdf of the papers, etc.
  • Moderators can access this information by logging into www.asee.org, clicking on upcoming conferences, clicking on 2023 Annual, and then click on Moderator Sessions.

 

Food & Beverage

 

  • Guarantees – when ordering F&B please indicate if you want a specific amount or if you want ASEE HQ to guarantee based on the number of people attending. Be advised that the division will be responsible for whatever amount is ordered/and or guaranteed.
  • There will be a check box to select when you pick your menu item to indicate which method you prefer
  • Menus are provided for each venue that will have sessions where there will be catering.
  • Program chairs can review menu prices starting in September
  • As soon as sessions are approved and assigned to space (late January) you will be able to select the desired food and beverage for your sessions
  • You can do this by clicking on the individual session and then clicking on the amenities tab
  • All food and beverage must be finalized by the May 21 deadline

 

Session Notes

You can add any special session notes for HQ reference in the text box in the Amenities Section under Manager Sessions

 

Special Requests

Be advised that all special requests for set-up, etc. should be added in the requests text box.

 

Finalizing Sessions

  • All sessions must be finalized by the May 21 deadlne. Finalizing a session includes the following:
  • Update all session titles and descriptions
  • Finalize all F&B orders
  • Finalize any Special AV or Internet Orders
  • Assign papers to technical sessions and put in preferred order
  • Assign a Moderator to each technical session and each Panel Session.

You can see an example of a session sets here: (link to room sets on web)

 

All Technical Sessions

  • All Technical Sessions will be set theater with head table for 4 on riser next to podium and mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Each meeting room will be set with a screen, projector, podium and mic
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Business Meetings

  • All business meetings will be set U-shape where applicable and/or available (for large business meetings that require a meal, those sessions will be placed in rooms that are set with banquet rounds).
  • All business meetings will be set with podium, mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Each business meeting room will have an LCD projector, screen and podium ad mic
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Social Events 

  • Social Events will receive a podium and mic and be set either reception style or banquet style depending on the type of event.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Panel Sessions 

  • All Panel Sessions will be set theater with head table for 4 with 2 tables mics on riser next to podium and mic, LCD Projector and screen.
  • Different sets must be requested at conferences@asee.org and will incur a fee
  • Additional AV requests can be made by clicking on the individual session link in manage sessions and then click on the “amenities” tab to add additional AV.

Please note that a fee will be incurred for additional AV orders.

 

Special Sessions

  • Special Sessions will be set according to the preference indicated by the program chair.
  • Depending on the type of room, the above default AV will be provided
  • Different sets and additional AV will incur a fee and can be added in the manage paper section per the above instructions

 

Offsite Events

  • As program chair, you are responsible for indicating the location of any offsite event and the process attendees will need to sign up for that offsite event.
  • ASEE can list an offsite event in the program guide and can collect ticket revenue for you.
  • Ticket revenue will be credited to the department BASS account
  • ASEE HQ can assist you in locating a venue and arranging payment for you. Please send an email with request and details to conferences@asee.org

 

“Bill To”

  • All costs incurred for division events will be charged either to the Division Operating and/or BASS account at the conclusion of the conference.
  • If a session is incurring a cost and that cost is covered by an outside entity, be sure to note that I the comments section of that session so that costs are allocated accordingly.

 

Division Session Financials

  • Please note that all session details can be obtained by clicking on the PDF session link to the right of the Manage Sessions page
  • A CSV link is also located to the right of the Manage Sessions page. This CSV will keep a running tally of costs to date on individual events as well as provide a subtotal for the division.
  • Also available is a CSV and PDF link of the previous year’s conference sessions for your convenience
  • Please note that sessions that have indicated an alternate “Bill To” funding source will not be available on these links.

 

Sunday Workshop Financials

  • BE ADVISED: All workshops not organized directly by the division must be paid in full by Friday, June 8, in advance of the Annual Conference or the workshop will not be permitted to be conducted on site.
  • Invoices and payment instructions will be provided to all Workshop Organizers directly

 

Sponsoring Sessions/Splitting Session Costs

If you plan to co-host an event with another division and split the cost, please note the percentage or dollar figure when sending the co-sponsor request.

 

Workshop Sets

  • All SundayWorkshops will be set classroom style with a head table for 4 on a riser with podium.
  • All expenses incurred, such as a different set, any additional AV or any F&B is the responsibility of the workshop organizer and must be requested on the application

As soon as the paper system opens, you want to create a pool of reviewers to review the abstracts and drafts for your division. Previous year’s division reviewers will be available for your use

You can invite your division’s reviewers by clicking on Reviewers on the right side of the main paper management screen.

Note: All reviews (abstracts and draft papers) are done in “double Anonymous” (meaning that the author does not know who the reviewers are and the reviewers do not know who the authors). Note: Program Chairs cannot be reviewers of abstracts or draft papers within their own division.

From the Reviewers page, you can view your division’s current reviewer roster, remove reviewers, and see the status of each reviewer’s reviews. You can also download reports with information on the reviewers and the status of their reviews.

From the Invite another reviewer page, you can add a reviewer in two ways: by searching through ASEE‟s membership or by providing the reviewer’s email address. When you invite a reviewer, they receive an email with instructions for logging in or creating an ASEE account. They have to log in and accept the invitation to be a reviewer before you can assign them any reviews. Reviewers can also decline the request. You will receive notification either way.

 

Reviewer Name

School

Reviewer Name

School

 

 

Reviewer Name

School

 

 

Assigning Abstract Reviews

Abstracts submitted to your division appear on the main paper management screen with the status assign reviews. Click on the paper’s title to view its details page.

On the abstract’s details page, you can scroll down to preview or download the abstract. If the abstract does not fit your division, consider contacting the program chair of a more relevant division and asking if he or she would accept the abstract. If so, select the division’s name under Transfer this abstract and press Transfer. The Program Chair that the abstract is transferred to will either allow or deny the abstract to their division.

If the abstract does fit your division, you can assign reviewers for it. Select a reviewer from the dropdown list in the Reviews section and press Assign review.

After assigning a reviewer, you can continue to add other reviewers. Only 1 review per abstract is necessary, remind reviewers when a deadline is approaching, or remove a reviewer.

Once you have assigned reviewers for this abstract, its status changes to Awaiting reviews and it moves lower in the list of papers on the main paper management screen.

 

Abstract Decision

When the review is complete, the paper’s status changes to Abstract Decision and will move to the top of the list.

On the abstract’s details page, you can now view the rankings and comments provided by reviewers, compose comments to the abstract’s author, and decide to accept or reject it.

If the abstract is accepted then the abstract’s status changes to Awaiting draft until the author reviews your comments and uploads a draft version.

 

 

Assigning Draft Reviews

When the author submits a draft, the paper’s status changes to assign reviews and its phase changes from abstract to paper. On the paper’s details page you can assign, remove and browse reviews just as you did for the abstract. The paper’s status changes to Await reviews until the draft reviews are complete. These reviews are handled in the same manner as abstract reviews with the exception of being able to be nominated for best paper and the reviewer can also recommend the draft be accepted with changes, as well as accepted or rejected.

 

Draft Decision

When the reviews are finished, the paper’s status changes to Draft Decision and moves to the top of your list of papers. The draft’s details page provides access to all reviews and allows you to compose comments to the author and accept or reject the paper as is or consolidate the reviewers comments and request revisions from the author.

Drafts that are accepted as is have a status of  Await Final

Drafts that require revision will have the status of  Await Draft Revisions.

When the author has uploaded the final version of an accepted draft the state will appear as

Accepted until they have paid the registration fee and accepted the copyright.

Once the author completes those steps the paper will have a status of  Process Complete.

When a paper has major content revisions requested and the author uploads those revisions, the status changes to  Review Revisions.

PLEASE BE ADVISED that Reviewers need to confirm that revisions were made to the paper and then send the Program Chair recommendations to accept or reject.

Reviewers are automatically assigned to a draft revision when it is uploaded.

The details page allows you to accept or reject all revised papers. 

An accepted draft revision will have a status of  Accepted and the author will be asked to pay the registration fee and accept copyright.

If a reviewer recommends a draft to be “accepted,” the reviewer will be asked to rank the paper by using the below matrix. This will assist in the ranking for Best Paper, as well as assist program chairs with the accept/reject decisions.

BE ADVISED: ranking the paper using the rubric is optional for reviewers.

Your final task in regards to papers is to nominate the best papers from your division. Each division may select up to 10% of its papers as best papers, but only one best paper per division may be submitted to the division PIC for consideration in the PIC Best Paper competition.

Each row is to be scored independently from zero to three points.

 

 

3-Excellent

2- Good

1 - Satisfactory

0 – Needs Improvement

CONTENT

Originality

Content contains highly original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Content contains some original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic

Content contains moderately original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Content contains minimal original treatment of, or new perspective on, the topic.

Research Approach

The research approach is novel and/or sophisticated and appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific).

The research approach is advanced and appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific)

The research approach is basic, but still appropriate for the purpose of the paper, and is consistent with the perspective (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, or more specific).

The research approach is inadequate and/or not appropriate for the purpose of the paper.

Results

Data collection and assessment results are very clear and logical, strongly supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results are clear and logical, supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results are somewhat clear and logical, moderately supporting the goals of the paper.

Data collection and assessment results need improvement.

Scholarship

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a significant extent.

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a moderate extent.

Content reviews and builds on appropriate prior work to a limited extent.

Content does not review and build on appropriate prior work.

Relevance

The paper makes a highly significant contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a significant contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a moderate contribution to the field of engineering education.

The paper makes a minimal contribution to the field of engineering education.

FOCUS

Goals

The goals are strongly developed and explicitly stated

The goals are developed and explicitly stated.

The goals are not fully developed and/or stated.

The goals are not developed and/or stated

Order

The order in which ideas are presented is explicitly and consistently clear, logical and effective.

The order in which ideas are presented is reasonably clear, logical and effective, but could be improved

The order in which ideas are presented is occasionally confusing.

There is little apparent structure to the flow of ideas, causing confusion.

Conclusions

The conclusions are very well formulated and are strongly supported by the data.

The conclusions are well formulated and are supported by the data.

The conclusions are moderately effective and are only partially supported by the data.

The conclusions are minimally effective and do not appear to be supported by the data

LANGUAGE

Style

The paper is clear, concise, and consistent. It is easily understandable and a pleasure to read.

The paper is mostly understandable, with occasional inconsistencies that could be improved

Multiple sections of the paper are difficult to read/understand. The paper could be better structured or more clearly explained

The paper is difficult to read/understand due to sentence/paragraph structure, word choices, lack of explanations, etc.

Mechanics

The writing is near perfect with little to no grammar or spelling errors.

Minor grammar or spelling errors are present, but do not detract from the content. Content is clear

Some grammar or spelling errors are significant and detract from the content. Paper requires further editing.

Pervasive grammar or spelling errors distort meaning and make reading difficult.

Each Author who submits an abstract to the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition is responsible for:

  • Reading the information and following the instructions within the Author's Kit throughout every step of their submission
  • Submitting a plain text abstract in the designated text box
  • Acknowledging the plagiarism policy
  • Acknowledging the copyright policy
  • Submit the draft and final paper directly through the paper management system as a PDF ONLY
  • Checking the PDF in the Paper Management System after each submission of their abstract and paper to ensure that the file transmitted properly
  • Meeting all deadlines for uploads and registration fees
  • Making sure that their co-authors are properly added on their submission
  • Contacting ASEE staff at conferences@asee.org  if there is a problem with their submission or account
  • Contacting the program chair with any issues concerning the content of their paper or their session assignment.  
  • Assigning someone to make their submission and/or payment for them if they are not available to do so themselves (be sure to provide that person with all necessary account information to do so)
  • Indicating who will be presenting the paper on site
  • Acknowledge that if a paper only has one author registered, and that author cancels their registration, their paper will be withdrawn

  • Session moderators play an important role in the smooth operation of any conference. Only people with experience as a presenter and only someone with a personality of sufficient strength should be selected for this role.
  • Moderators should familiarize themselves with the pronunciation of the names of their speakers prior to the session.
  • Moderators should make it clear to the speakers that the session time belongs to the moderator, and that no one is “entitled” to any amount not granted.
  • Moderators should communicate with the presenters at least 2 weeks prior to the conference, relaying time limits, equipment limitations, room location and pre-presentation expectations to the speakers.
  • Moderators should enforce time limits with agreed symbols to the presenters, i.e. standing with 1 minute left to go, holding up a placard , etc. All this should be communicated prior to the session start.
  • Moderators should control the asking and answering of questions, with questioners required to identify themselves and their affiliation.
  • Moderators should protect student speakers from grandstanding or adversarial questioners.
  • Moderators should arrive at the end of the previous session and ascertain that the AV equipment is functional. If a common computer is mandated, it should be set up with presentations pre-loaded.
  • The session moderator is an active participant in the proceedings, not a bored bystander reading names of talks.

Policy on Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication

American Society for Engineering Education

May 31, 2013; Revised October 2, 2014

Preamble

The American Society for Engineering Education serves the engineering and technology communities by offering professional conferences, networking opportunities, and support of research in the various fields of engineering and technology related to education. Research is disseminated to the wider community via the organization’s professional publications. ASEE subscribes to the highest standards of ethical conduct, as detailed in the “ASEE Statement on Engineering Ethics Education,” located on the society’s website at http://www.asee.org/about-us/the-organization/our-board-of-directors/asee-board-of-directors-statements/engineering-ethics-education

In scholarly publication, plagiarism occurs when an author copies the words, illustrations, and ideas of others without identifying the sources. Plagiarism is unethical because it represents the theft of the intellectual work of others, and the subsequent misrepresentation of that work as the author’s own. An act of plagiarism not only violates intellectual property rights but is anathema to the principle of academic integrity, which is fundamental for scholarly research, writing, and publication. Inadvertent publication of plagiarized material can undermine the quality of a journal or proceedings.

When authors copy not from others but from themselves, by publishing the same article in multiple journals, the practice is called redundant or duplicate publication. Compared with plagiarism, duplicate publication is generally considered less serious, but it is still unethical. (The only exception is when reprinting has been appropriately approved and permission obtained from the original copyright holder; e.g., a keynote speech that has also been published.) Duplicate publication of the same article wastes space in journals and time of reviewers. Duplicate publication misrepresents the author’s record of scholarly contributions, and it corrupts meta-analyses of multiple studies on the same subject.

This policy outlines the steps that ASEE will take in response to allegations of plagiarism and duplicate publication involving articles published in or submitted to ASEE journals, magazines, and conference proceedings, including the annual conference, section and zone meetings, and the global colloquium.

Definitions and Scope

  1. The original paper is the paper or source from which the words and ideas were copied. The second paper is the paper in which the copied text later appears. This policy applies both when the second paper is a submitted manuscript and when the second paper has appeared in print.
  2. This policy applies when either the original paper or the second paper has appeared in an ASEE publication, or when the second paper has been submitted to an ASEE publication.
  3. In this policy, the author is the author of the second paper. The policy applies with equal force to all co-authors of the second paper.
  4. Plagiarism occurs when the second paper copies a significant amount of text from the original paper without proper citation of the source (e.g., beyond “fair use” in copyright law). For this policy, plagiarism requires that the copying be either verbatim or nearly verbatim (with minor insignificant changes) without citing the original source. Whereas other definitions of plagiarism include close paraphrasing from an unattributed source, the strict definition in this policy enables editors to focus on the clearest cases, without expending effort to evaluate whether an instance of paraphrasing constitutes plagiarism. Note that citations are not required for ideas that are well known within the field of the paper.  
  5. Duplicate publication occurs when at least one author is in common between the original paper and the second paper.
  6. For this policy, to qualify as a case of duplicate publication, the original paper must be an article in a peer-reviewed journal or peer-reviewed conference proceedings. When the original paper is on an unreviewed website or in an unreviewed conference proceedings, the submission or publication of the second paper is not considered duplicate publication; however, the author must notify the journal editor at time of submission as to where and when the paper was originally published. When the author republishes an original ASEE conference paper in a journal, the author or the journal first must secure a copyright release from ASEE, and the second paper must identify the original source.
  7. The Editor-in-Chief of an ASEE publication is the editor who has ultimate responsibility for that publication. For an ASEE conference proceedings, the overall conference chair fulfills that role.

Procedure

  1. An allegation of plagiarism or duplicate publication must be made by the initiator—who might be either a reviewer or reader—in writing. The allegation must include all relevant evidence, such as the original sources, and must be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief of the appropriate ASEE publication.
  2. Within 14 calendar days, the Editor-in-Chief will review the allegation. If the Editor-in-Chief concurs that the allegation represents a potential instance of plagiarism or serious duplicate publication, the Editor-in-Chief will refer the allegation to an ad hoc investigation committee. If the Editor-in-Chief and the Executive Director of ASEE agree that the allegation represents duplicate publication of substantially less than 50% of the original or second paper, the Editor-in-Chief will request a correction from the author; if the author does not respond in writing within 30 calendar days, this process will continue. 
  3. The ad hoc investigation committee will be appointed by the Executive Director of ASEE. That committee will include an editor or associate editor from an ASEE publication who is not involved with the allegation and three other appropriate members whose expertise includes the subject matter of the papers named in the allegation. 
  4. The investigation committee will evaluate the written evidence and report its findings to the Editor-in-Chief within 30 days. If the committee finds clear and convincing evidence that plagiarism or duplicate publication has occurred, the report will recommend an appropriate sanction (see below).
  5. If the allegation is not dismissed, the Editor-in-Chief will immediately forward the investigation committee’s report to each author of the second paper, inviting each to respond in writing within 30 days. The Editor-in-Chief may ask each author to describe the various roles of each co-author concerning the incident.
  6. Within 14 days of receiving all of the authors’ responses, or after the 30 day response period has elapsed, the Editor-in-Chief will decide to either accept the recommended sanction or modify it as appropriate. The Editor-in-Chief will deliver the decision to the author, co-authors, and the investigation committee in writing.
  7. If the second paper has multiple authors, the Editor-in-Chief may choose different sanctions for different authors, depending on their roles in the preparation of the second paper.
  8. For each author who is at an academic institution, the Editor-in-Chief will send copies of the evidence, the investigation committee’s report, and the sanction notification to the research integrity officer (RIO) of the author’s institution. If the institution has no RIO, the Editor-in-Chief will notify the institution’s academic vice president or equivalent administrator.
  9. The author may appeal the decision of the Editor-in-Chief to the Executive Director of ASEE, in writing, within 30 days. Upon reviewing the evidence, the Executive Director may reduce the severity of the sanction, but may not increase the sanction. The Executive Director will then convey the decision on the appeal to the author and the institution’s RIO. The Executive Director’s decision is final. 

Sanctions

 

  1. Extensive cases. A plagiarism case is considered extensive if more than 50% of the original paper is plagiarized, or more than 50% of the second paper represents plagiarized material. In this case, all of the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals and conferences will be immediately rejected. In addition, the author will be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for three to five years. If the second paper appeared in an ASEE journal or conference, a notice of plagiarism will be printed where appropriate.
  2. Serious cases. A plagiarism case is considered serious if a substantial amount of either the original paper or the second paper is plagiarized. A duplicate publication case is serious if more than 50% of the original or second paper represents duplicated material. In this case, all of the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals and conferences will be immediately rejected. In addition, the author will be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for one to three years. If the second paper appeared in an ASEE journal or conference, a notice of plagiarism or duplicate publication will be printed where appropriate.
  3. Significant cases. A case of plagiarism is considered significant if 300 or more consecutive words are copied verbatim or nearly verbatim. A duplicate publication case is significant if a substantial amount of the original or second paper represents duplicated material. In this case, the author’s manuscripts currently under review by ASEE journals or conferences may be rejected. In addition, the author may be prohibited from publication in ASEE publications for at most one year.

Additional Policies

 

  1. Confidentiality. The Editor-in-Chief and others involved in carrying out this policy will maintain the confidentiality of the identities of the initiator and the author, and the confidentiality of all correspondence regarding the case and its disposition.
  2. Conflict of interest. All editors who have a conflict of interest with the author or the author’s institution will recuse themselves from this process.
  3. Diversity. The Editor-in-Chief and others who carry out this policy will respect cultural differences in citation practices by different scholarly communities and academic disciplines.
  4. Non-retaliation. If the initiator has brought the allegation in good faith, then there should be no retaliation against the initiator.
  5. Records. After a finding of plagiarism or duplicate publication, if the second paper has appeared in an ASEE journal or conference proceedings, then the electronic version of the paper will be permanently marked as plagiarized or duplicated, and a reference to the source will be included.

Modifications. Minor modifications in this policy may be made at the discretion of the Executive Director of ASEE. For example, the Executive Director may extend a time period for good reasons, or appoint a substitute for the Editor-in-Chief in a case of conflict of interest.

ASEE ANNUAL CONFERENCE & EXPOSITION 

COPYRIGHT TRANSFER FORM

 

 

 

Title of Paper: ________________________________________________________________________

 

Author(s): ______ _____________________________________________________________________

 

Publication: ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings                           Session #: ___________

 

 

 

 

PART A

The undersigned, desiring to publish the above paper in a publication of ASEE or co-sponsored by ASEE, hereby transfers their copyrights in the above paper to the American Society for Engineering Education, known as ASEE. 

 

In return for these rights, ASEE hereby grants the above author(s), and the employers for whom the work was performed, permission to:

-- Reuse portions of the above paper in other works.

-- Reproduce the above paper for personal or internal use, provided that (a) the source and ASEE copyright are indicated, (b) the copies are not used in a way that implies ASEE endorsement of product or service of an employer, and (c) the copies are not offered for sale.

 

In exercising its rights under copyright, ASEE requires that:

-- The consent of the first-named author is sought as a condition in granting republication permission by others.

-- The consent of the authors or their employers be obtained as a condition in granting permission to others to reuse a portion or all of the paper for promotion or marketing purposes.

 

Name: _________________________________       Title: ________________________________

 

Signature: __________________________________ (if not author, then relationship to author)

 

Employer: ___________________________________                       Date Form Signed: ______________

 

 

 

PART B

(For U.S. Government Employees Only)

This will certify that all authors of the above paper are employees of the U.S. Government and performed this work as part of their employment.

 

Name: _________________________________       Title:  ______________________________

 

Signature: __________________________________ (if not author, then relationship to author)

 

Govt. Organization: _________________________________ Date Form Signed: ____________