The ACM Student Research Competition held at the SIGCSE Technical Symposium will consist of graduate and undergraduate categories of competition, each with prizes awarded based on judging during the conference. A submission to the Student Research Competition should describe recently completed or ongoing student research in any area of Computer Science / Computing.
- All graduate submissions must represent a student’s individual research contribution — neither supervisors nor other students are allowed as coauthors.
- Undergraduate submissions may represent individual or team research contributions. Research completed while the student was an undergraduate may be submitted to the undergraduate category even if the student is now a first-year graduate student. In case of a team submission, one person should be designated by the team to attend the conference and make the oral presentation.
The author making the SRC submission must still be a student at the time of the deadline. Entrants must be active ACM Student Members, and membership numbers will be requested as part of the submission process along with details about the project’s faculty supervisor. Verification of current enrollment will also be requested as part of the submission form. Authors submitting to SRC are **not **allowed to submit the same submission to the Posters track; they can only submit it to a single track. Any submissions made to more than one track will be desk rejected from both tracks.
Authors submitting work to SIGCSE TS 2023 are responsible for complying with all applicable conference authorship policies and those articulated by ACM. If you have questions about any of these policies, please contact email@example.com for clarification prior to submission.
Authors of accepted submissions will have the option of participating in the Student Research Competition either in-person by physically attending the conference in Toronto, Canada, or online.
All authors of this track must pre-declare their intended presentation modality at the time of submission. Your choice of modality will not be shared with reviewers, and will not impact their assessment of your submission. For timely planning for the conference, your choice of modality CANNOT be changed after the submission deadline.
Deadlines and Submission
ACM SRC submissions to the SIGCSE TS 2023 must be made through EasyChair no later than Friday, October 14, 2022. The track chairs reserve the right to desk reject submissions that are incomplete after the deadline has passed.
|Due Date||Friday, October 14, 2022|
|Due Time||23:59 AoE (Anywhere on Earth, UTC-12h)|
|Submission Limits||2 pages (including a 250-word abstract) + 1 page only for references|
|Notification to Authors||(tentative) Monday, November 14, 2022|
Instructions for Authors
All SRC submissions must have a plain-text abstract of up to 250 words. Abstracts should not contain subheadings or citations. The abstract should be submitted in EasyChair along with paper metadata, and it should be included in the PDF version of the submission at the appropriate location.
SIGCSE TS 2023 is not participating in the new ACM workflow, template, and production system. All SRC submissions must be in English and formatted using the 2-column ACM SIG Conference Proceedings format and US letter size pages (8.5x11 inch or 215.9 x 279.4mm).
Page Limits: SRC submissions are limited to a maximum of 2 pages of body content (including all titles, author information, abstract, main text, tables and illustrations, acknowledgements, and supplemental material). One additional page may be included which contains only references. If included, appendix materials MUST NOT be present on the optional references page.
MS Word Authors: Please use the interim Word template provided by ACM. NOTE: Each author should be defined separately for accurate metadata identification. Multiple authors may share one affiliation. Include space for authors’ e-mail addresses whenever possible on separate lines. Grouping authors’ names or e-mail addresses, or providing an ‘e-mail alias’ is not acceptable, e.g.,
- Overleaf provides a suitable two-column sig conference proceedings template.
- Other LaTeX users may alternatively use the ACM Primary template, adding the “sigconf” format option in the documentclass to obtain the 2-column format.
- NOTE: The default LaTeX template text shows appendix materials following the references. SIGCSE TS 2023 does not permit appendices on the optional page allotted for references. Authors must include all relevant content within the 2 body pages of the submission.
At the time of submission all entries should include space for all author information, an abstract, body content, and references. NOTE: ACM SRC submissions may omit the following sections from the standard ACM template: keywords, CCS Concepts, and placeholders for the ACM Reference Format and copyright blocks.
Submissions that do not adhere to page limits or formatting requirements will be desk rejected without review.
Accessibility: SIGCSE TS 2023 authors are strongly encouraged to prepare submissions using these templates in such a manner that the content is widely accessible to potential reviewers, track chairs, and readers. Please see these resources for preparing an accessible submission.
Students entering the ACM SRC are strongly encouraged to use the following standardized section names within their submissions (using the templates above) to facilitate judging.
- Abstract: Max 250 words
- Problem and Motivation: This section should clearly state the problem being addressed and explain the reasons for seeking a solution to this problem.
- Background and Related Work: This section should describe the specialized (but pertinent) background necessary to appreciate the work. Include references to the literature where appropriate, and briefly explain where your work departs from that done by others. Reference lists do not count towards the limit on the length of the abstract.
- Approach and Uniqueness: This section should describe your approach in investigating the problem and should clearly state how your approach is novel.
- Results and Contributions: This section should clearly show how the results of your work contribute to computer science and should explain the significance of those results.
Submissions to the ACM Student Research Competition track are reviewed with the single-anonymous review process. Submissions should include author names and affiliations. Thus, the author identities are known to reviewers, but reviewers are anonymous to each other and to the authors.
The reviewing process includes a discussion phase after initial reviews have been posted. During this time, the reviewers can examine all reviews and privately discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the work in an anonymous manner through EasyChair. This discussion information can be used by the track chairs in addition to the content of the review in making final acceptance decisions.
The SIGCSE TS 2023 review process does not have a rebuttal period for authors to respond to comments, and all acceptance decisions are final.
By submitting your article to an ACM Publication, you are hereby acknowledging that you and your co-authors are subject to all ACM Publications Policies, including ACM’s new Publications Policy on Research Involving Human Participants and Subjects (https://www.acm.org/publications/policies/research-involving-human-participants-and-subjects). Alleged violations of this policy or any ACM Publications Policy will be investigated by ACM and may result in a full retraction of your paper, in addition to other potential penalties, as per ACM Publications Policy.
Please ensure that you and your co-authors obtain an ORCID ID (https://orcid.org/register), so you can complete the publishing process for your accepted paper. ACM has been involved in ORCID from the start and we have recently made a commitment to collect ORCID IDs from all of our published authors (https://authors.acm.org/author-resources/orcid-faqs). The collection process has started and will roll out as a requirement throughout 2022. We are committed to improve author discoverability, ensure proper attribution and contribute to ongoing community efforts around name normalization; your ORCID ID will help in these efforts.
Post-Acceptance and Presentation Information
The full text of accepted ACM SRC submissions will not appear in the ACM digital library. Only the title, author metadata, and a 250-word abstract will be included in the official conference proceedings.
Judges will include professional computing educators attending the Symposium. Students’ research will be evaluated on the quality and significance of the work, and the quality and clarity of both an oral and visual presentation.
At the SIGCSE Technical Symposium, the first round of the competition evaluates the research during a poster presentation. Both an in-person and online poster session will be held for the ACM SRC competition to allow participation for both modalities.
Those students who are selected by the judges to advance to the second round continue in the competition by giving a short formal presentation of their research (10-minute presentation with 5 minutes for Q&A). The first, second, and third place winners as determined by the judges’ evaluation of the conference presentations in each of the undergraduate and graduate categories receive the prizes of $500, $300, and $200, respectively.
Further details about post-acceptance processes and presentation logistics will be provided by the time acceptance decisions are sent out.
The first-place winners from each category (graduate and undergraduate) will advance to the ACM Grand Finals of the Student Research Competition where the winners of several ACM conferences compete for more prizes and recognition.
Additional competition details, including information about past winners, can be found on the ACM Student Research Competition website.
ACM has partnered with International Science Editing (ISE) to provide language editing services to ACM authors. ISE offers a comprehensive range of services for authors including standard and premium English language editing, as well as illustration and translation services. Editing services are at author expense and do not guarantee publication of a manuscript.
Instructions for Reviewers
|Reviewing Phase||Start Date||End Date|
|Reviewing||Saturday, October 15, 2022||Sunday, October 30, 2022|
|Discussion & Recommendations||Monday, October 31, 2022||Friday, November 4, 2022|
The ACM Student Research Competition offers a unique opportunity for undergraduate and graduate students to present their original research in any area of computer science at SIGCSE. There are two categories of competition, graduate and undergraduate, with prizes awarded based on judging during the conference. A submission to the Student Research Competition should describe recently completed or ongoing student research in any area of Computer Science. All graduate submissions must represent a student’s individual research contribution — neither supervisors nor other students are allowed as coauthors. Undergraduate submissions may represent either individual or team research contributions. Research completed while the student was an undergraduate may be submitted to the undergraduate category even if the student is now a first-year graduate student.
Students whose ACM SRC abstracts are accepted as a result of the review will be invited to make poster presentations at the conference. The top three poster presenters in each of the undergraduate and graduate levels, as determined by SRC judges, will then be invited to present their work orally. The top three in each category will be recognized at the Saturday plenary.
Submissions to the SRC track are reviewed with the single-anonymous review process. Submissions should include author names and affiliations. Thus, the author identities are known to reviewers, but reviewers are anonymous to each other and to the authors.
The reviewing process includes a discussion phase after initial reviews have been posted. During this time, the reviewers can examine all reviews and privately discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the work in an anonymous manner through EasyChair. Reviewers can refer to each other by their reviewer number on that submission’s review. This discussion information can be used by the track chairs in addition to the content of the review in making final acceptance decisions.
The SIGCSE TS 2023 review process does not have a rebuttal period for authors to respond to comments, and all acceptance decisions are final.
When you receive your invitation to review for SIGCSE TS 2023, please take a few moments to update your profile and select 3-5 topics that you are most qualified for reviewing. To do so, select SIGCSE TS 2023 > My topics from the menu.
Please check at most 5 topics! More topics will make it harder for the EasyChair system to make a good set of matches.
Before starting your review, you may be asked by the Track Chairs to declare conflicts with any submitting authors. Please do so in a timely manner so we can avoid conflicts during assignment.
As a Reviewer, we ask that you carefully read each submission assigned to you and write a constructive review that concisely summarizes what you believe the submission to be about. When reviewing a submission, consider:
- the strengths and weaknesses,
- the contribution to an outstanding SIGCSE TS 2023 program and experience for attendees, and
- how it brings new ideas or extends current ideas through replication to the field and to practitioners and researchers of computing education.
Keep in mind that ACM SRC submissions represent student work and they are meant to be a place to present and receive feedback on work by early researchers. Please provide constructive feedback and clearly justify your choice of rating to help the authors. A review that gives a low score with no written comments is not helpful to the authors since it simply tells the authors that they have been unsuccessful, with no indication of how or why.
Reviewers should evaluate student abstracts on the following criteria by providing a numeric score and summary of the contribution in each area:
- Problem and motivation
- Background and related work
- Approach and uniqueness
- Results and contribution
Additionally, reviewers will be asked to summarize the work, provide their familiarity with the submission topic, identify whether the research topic is an appropriate computer science subdiscipline, identify strengths and weaknesses of the submission, and provide an overall evaluation. Reviewers may provide confidential comments to the SRC Track Co-Chairs to address concerns about the submission. These comments will not be shared with submitting authors.
While your review text should clearly support your scores and recommendation, please do not include your preference for acceptance or rejection of a submission in the feedback to the authors. Instead, use the provided radio buttons to make a recommendation (the authors will not see this) based on your summary review and provide any details that refer to your recommendation directly in the confidential comments to the APC or track chairs. Remember that as a reviewer, you will only see a small portion of the submissions, so one that you recommend for acceptance may be rejected when considering the other reviewer recommendations and the full set of submissions.
The discussion and recommendation period provides the opportunity for the Track Chairs to discuss reviews and feedback so they can provide the best recommendation for acceptance or rejection to the Program Chairs and that the submission is given full consideration in the review process. We ask that Reviewers engage in discussion when prompted by other reviewers and the Track Chairs by using the Comments feature of EasyChair. During this period you will be able to revise your review based on the discussion, but you are not required to do so.
The Track Chairs will make a final recommendation to the Program Chairs from your feedback.
Reviewers who don’t submit reviews, have reviews with limited constructive feedback, or who submit inappropriate reviews will be removed from the reviewer list (as per SIGCSE policy). Recalcitrant reviewers will be informed of their removal from the reviewer list. Reviewers with repeated offenses (two within a three year period) will be removed from SIGCSE reviewing for three years.