Call for Reviewers FAQs

Below is a list of frequently asked questions about the review process:

Q. How will I be assessing each proposal application?

A. A blind peer review will be conducted based on the call for submission revised rubric which will be made available to reviewers. The approximate number of submissions to be evaluated by each reviewer will be conveyed upon acceptance to serve as a peer reviewer. An online grading tool will be employed to capture reviewer assessments and feedback.

Q. Can I review less than 10 proposal submissions?

A. We strongly encourage volunteers who can review a minimum of 10 proposal submissions to apply to serve as peer reviewers.

Q. What is the expected time commitment?

A. Beginning July 1 – 30, 2024, we estimate it will take 4-8 hours to evaluate a minimum of 10 proposals that will be assigned in 1 or more of the identified conference strands via an online grading platform.

Q. Can I serve as a reviewer if I am submitting a proposal?

A. Yes, a proposal submitter may volunteer to serve as a reviewer and should disclose any conflict of interest based on the AACTE Conflict of Interest Policy as soon as possible after reviewers’ assignments have been identified. A reviewer may abstain from reviewing a submission within the online grading platform at any time during the review period.

Q. Can I serve as a reviewer if I am a doctoral student?

A. Yes, we welcome doctoral students to volunteer as reviewers.

Q. What should I write in my comments?

A. For each category listed on the rubric, reviewers should justify the rating. These comments can include suggestions on how to improve the session, changes that need to be made, etc. Please make your review as informative and substantiated as possible; superficial, uninformed reviews are worse than no review as they may contribute noise to the review process.

Q. Will the submitter/speaker(s) see my review comments?

A. No, session organizers and speakers cannot see reviewer comments. Since a request for an explanation as to why their proposed session was declined can be made, we provide an opportunity for reviewers to provide constructive feedback anonymously to be shared with proposal submitters, but the session organizers and speakers will not receive a copy of the comments left by reviewers during the grading process.

Q. What if I like the content of a session, but I believe it should be presented in a different format?

A. If a reviewer believes a proposed session should be presented at the annual meeting but needs to be reformatted, they will have the opportunity to share these thoughts within the online grading platform.

Q. What if I like the content of a session but I believe the speakers need to be changed?

A. On the rubric, there is a section specifically dedicated to the speakers planning to present each proposed session that viewers will assess within the online grading platform.

Please contact Altovise Davis at with any additional questions.