Skip to main content

(Example) iLEAD 2026 Conference Review Criteria

Status: Pending General Chairs’ Approval

Applies to: iLEAD 2026 Conference Submissions

Steward: Program Chair

Approval Authority: General Chairs

Established: January 2026

Last Updated: [date]


Purpose

This page defines the review criteria used for evaluating submissions to the iLEAD 2026 Conference. The criteria are published to support transparency, consistency, and shared understanding among contributors, reviewers, and program leadership.

These criteria serve two functions:

  1. For authors – to clarify expectations and support the development of strong, well-aligned submissions.
  2. For reviewers and chairs – to guide evaluation, calibration, and program-building decisions.

This document functions as an example of a versioned procedural standard. Updates or revisions are documented and stewarded through the iLEAD governance process.


Scope

The review criteria apply to all iLEAD 2026 submission categories, unless otherwise noted in specific calls or track guidance.

Where appropriate, tracks or formats may provide additional contextual guidance, but such guidance does not replace or override the core criteria defined here.


iLRN iLEAD Review Criteria

The criteria below are applied holistically. Reviewers are asked to consider submissions in relation to their stated purpose, context, and intended contribution.

1. Relevance to iLEAD and the 2026 Conference Theme

  • Alignment with immersive learning as a field of research, design, practice, or application
  • Relevance to the 2026 conference theme and/or the mission of iLEAD
  • Clarity of intended audience and contribution

2. Conceptual and Scholarly Grounding

  • Appropriateness and clarity of theoretical, conceptual, or methodological framing
  • Engagement with relevant literature, practice, or prior work
  • Coherence between goals, approach, and claims

 

3. Quality of Design, Method, or Practice

  • Soundness of research design, learning design, or development process
  • Appropriateness of methods, tools, or platforms used
  • Evidence of thoughtful implementation or inquiry

 

4. Contribution and Significance

  • Contribution to knowledge, practice, or community understanding
  • Potential value for the iLEAD community and broader field
  • Originality, insight, or synthesis

 

5. Clarity, Organization, and Communication

  • Clarity of writing or presentation
  • Logical organization and completeness
  • Accessibility to the intended audience

 

Additional Considerations

Depending on submission type, reviewers may also consider:

  • Ethical considerations and responsible practice
  • Inclusivity, accessibility, and cultural awareness
  • Transparency of limitations and future directions

These considerations are not scored independently but inform overall judgment.

Review Process Notes

  • Submissions are reviewed by qualified reviewers using these criteria as a shared framework.
  • Final program decisions are made by the Program Chairs in consultation with Track Chairs and the General Chairs.
  • Acceptance decisions reflect both submission quality and overall program balance.
  • iLEAD 2026 Call for Submissions
  • Reviewer Guidelines and Training Materials
  • Recorded iLEAD Webinar (November 25, 2025) – Review Criteria Overview
  • Relevant iLEAD Design Patterns and Standards (where applicable)


Versioning and Revision

This page represents the current review criteria for the iLEAD 2026 Conference. Prior versions, revisions, or post-conference reflections may be archived for reference.


Editorial Note

The iLEAD review criteria are intended to support fairness, transparency, and constructive evaluation. They are reviewed periodically to ensure alignment with evolving practices, community feedback, and the broader goals of the iLEAD Innovation Garden.

Back to top