Abstracts+2018

**Deadline: April 9, 2018** Notification of acceptance: May 15, 2018 **Link to submission: [|submit abstracts here]** NOTE: Please carefully follow the instructions listed at this site for uploading your abstracts
 * Abstracts for 2018 National Meeting **
 * Abstract Submissions **

The Society for the Advancement of Biology Education Research (SABER) invites you to submit abstracts for the annual National Meeting. Review these guidelines when preparing and submitting your abstract. In the three sections below, you will find:
 * 1) A summary of the four presentation formats for which you may submit an abstract
 * 2) An overview of the evaluation criteria used by reviewers to select abstracts
 * 3) Additional instructions and considerations for preparing your abstract

Several abstracts from past years are available to help you determine which presentation format to choose and to guide you in preparing your abstract. These abstracts are posted on the abstract submission page on SABER website. All abstracts previously presented at SABER are also available on the past meetings page.

Do not include identifying information in your abstract. To maintain a blinded review process, the title and main text of your abstract, as well as any files that you submit, cannot include the names of researchers or institutions involved in the study. If any identifying information is included, your identity will be revealed to the reviewers and may bias their review. The integrity of this blinded review process is a community effort, and we are relying on authors to submit blinded abstracts. Members of the abstracts committee are volunteers and do not have the capacity to remove identifiable information from abstracts.

The review process is blinded in three ways to minimize bias. First, the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. Second, the reviewers do not know the identity of the authors. Finally, a limited number of people on the abstracts committee have access to the identifiable information, and they are not involved in the decision-making process. Therefore, the committee members who make decisions on abstracts based on reviewers’ scores also do not know the identities of the authors or the reviewers.

A. Presentation Formats Abstracts may be submitted for one of four possible presentation formats described below. The word limit for your abstract is determined by the presentation format you choose. While a broad range of projects are likely to be suitable for a poster presentation, roundtable, or short talk, long talks are intended to synthesize multiple projects focused on big ideas in biology education research. If we are unable to accept your abstract in your preferred format based on reviewer recommendations, it may be selected to be presented in an alternative format. You will have an option to indicate other preferred formats in the submission process.

**1. Long Talks** | Abstract word limit: **4,000 characters** (including spaces) These 40-minute talks are intended for journal-quality projects that have been completed and are nearing publication. Strong long talk submissions will likely integrate multiple smaller projects. The most successful long talk abstracts will be of general interest to the entire SABER community. Abstracts submitted for long talks may be recommended during the review process for short talks, roundtables, or poster presentations, as per the author’s preference.

**2. Short Talks** | Abstract word limit: **4,000** characters (including spaces) These 20-minute talks are intended to showcase results that are being prepared for publication. Emphasis is on communicating robust findings (i.e., appropriate and thorough, triangulation of diverse data streams), tried and tested instruments and protocols, and other developed work. Abstracts submitted for short talks may be recommended during the review process for roundtables or poster presentations, as per the author’s preference. Depending on the meeting schedule, short talk abstracts may be selected for a long talk or a featured plenary session based on reviewers’ scores.

3. **Roundtables** | Abstract word limit: **3,000** characters (including spaces) Roundtables are one-hour, small-group presentations and discussions on similar research projects. Each presenter has approximately 10 minutes to present their work, with the remaining time for feedback, suggestions, and larger group discussion from all presenters and non-presenting participants. The short presentations are used as a springboard for interaction, discussion, and critique. Presenters are encouraged to prepare a one-page summary, including focused discussion questions, to share with session attendees. Abstracts submitted for roundtables may also be recommended during the review process for poster presentations, as per the author’s preference.

4. **Poster Presentation |** Abstract word limit: **3,000** characters (including spaces) Poster presentations are ideal for sharing a new or developing project or gaining specific advice on a particular set of data. Projects that are still early in development are encouraged, including studies with promising, yet minimal, outcomes data, or studies with inconclusive results.

B. Evaluation Criteria All abstracts will undergo a triple-blind review process (described on the first page) with multiple reviewers from the community. These reviewers will recommend abstracts based on the abstract rubric established by the SABER Abstract Committee and final decisions will be made by the Abstract Committee. A copy of this rubric is posted below.

All abstracts will be evaluated using the same abstract rubric. While different considerations will be applied to each presentation format, all formats will be evaluated in four areas:
 * 1) 1. Research Question or Problem. Strong abstracts will provide a clear description of the research question and/or education problem being addressed. A sound rationale should be provided as well as an appropriate model, theoretical framework, or philosophy of the study.
 * 2) 2. Research Design. Strong abstracts will clearly describe the study’s context and/or literature base, as well as the research design and methods used. The abstract should provide enough information to demonstrate that the study’s design and methods are appropriate and well-aligned with the research question or problem being investigated.
 * 3) 3. Analyses and Interpretations. Strong abstracts will clearly describe the analysis of the data, include a description of key results (e.g., numerical results and/or examples of qualitative data as appropriate to the study), and provide some interpretation of the findings. All claims made in the abstract should be clearly supported by evidence and appropriate to the focus of the study and its methodology. Reviewers will also consider the appropriate level of completeness of the project based on the presentation format selected. While long and short talks are expected to have more thorough analyses (e.g., appropriate statistics, inclusion of diverse data streams, closer to publication), roundtables and poster presentations may include more preliminary data analyses.
 * 4) 4. Contribution. Strong abstracts should add to, refine, or refute the literature base in biology education. The abstract should provide clear implications for teaching, learning, or research in biology. Reviewers will also consider whether the study is likely to be of general interest to SABER attendees.

C. Additional Instructions
 * Do not include figures or references in your abstract.
 * You may submit as many abstracts as you would like, but a maximum of two abstracts will be accepted as talks (long or short) from any single research group in order to promote diversity at SABER. These decisions will be based on reviewers’ scores and will not be left to the discretion of the research group.
 * When you are ready to submit your abstract online, carefully follow the instructions detailed on the submission site for uploading your abstract.
 * When you submit your abstract online, you will be prompted to identify two keywords from the list below that best describe your study. Your selections will help facilitate reviewer assignment and session organization. If you select “other” as a keyword, you may not be matched with reviewers who share similar research interests and expertise.

Keywords (select up to three) ❏ Active learning ❏ Affect: interest, motivation, etc. ❏ Conceptual understanding ❏ Diversity, equity, and inclusion ❏ Institutional change ❏ Instrument development ❏ Research and laboratory experience ❏ Metacognition ❏ Professional development ❏ Science and society ❏ Science process skills ❏ Virtual learning ❏ Other:


 * SABER abstract Rubric **




 * SABER abstract sample **