All ETLTC conferences adhere to this criterion, where applicable.

However, we acknowledge that, in certain cases, the outcome may appear subjective, and we sincerely apologize for any such perception. 

Best Paper awards will be determined by a designated panel from the Conference Committee, and the panel’s decision shall be final and not subject to appeal.

Publication Policy Statement on Revise and Resubmit Opportunity

Papers rejected by the Conference Editorial Committee or the publisher due to misalignment with the publication scope, or thematic requirements of the AIP Conference Proceedings or MDPI Engineering Proceedings shall not be treated as permanently rejected submissions. Instead, such papers will be categorized under a “Revise and Resubmit” decision. 

Authors of these submissions (identified as a major revision recommended) will be granted an opportunity to substantially revise and realign their papers with the scope, quality expectations, and publication policies of the target proceedings publisher. Revised papers may then be resubmitted to a future conference within the ETLTC Core Conference Series or its officially affiliated partner conferences. 

The follow-up submission will be treated as a new submission and will undergo a fresh editorial and peer review process. There is no requirement for the revised paper to maintain specific content similarity, structure, or textual continuity with the previously submitted version. However, the overall research topic, thematic direction, or academic focus of the new submission should remain reasonably similar to and closely aligned with the previously reviewed work. This flexibility is provided specifically to allow authors to redesign, restructure, or substantially rewrite their work to better fit the aims, scope, and publication standards of the target proceedings journal or publisher. 

In cases where the desired revision is not identified as substantial, the paper could be resubmitted without resubmission to a future ETLTC conference. 

To support authors in this process, the Conference Editorial Committee may actively assist by providing guidance, editorial recommendations, scope-alignment advice, and publication-oriented feedback intended to help authors improve the suitability of their revised work for the target proceedings publication. Such support may include recommendations regarding thematic positioning, restructuring of the manuscript, methodological clarification, formatting alignment, and overall publication readiness. 

Upon resubmission (identified as a major revision recommended), the revised manuscript will undergo a new editorial evaluation and peer review process by the Conference Editorial Committee. If the revised paper is accepted for publication after review, it will be reconsidered for proceedings publication without any additional publication or resubmission fee. 

This policy reflects the ETLTC conference series’ commitment to supporting authors in improving the scholarly quality, relevance, and publication readiness of their work while maintaining compliance with the standards and scope requirements of partner proceedings publishers.

• Exceptions apply

Best Paper Award – Evaluation Criteria

1. Originality and Novelty (20%)

• Presents innovative ideas, frameworks, methodologies, or applications

• Demonstrates clear advancement beyond existing literature

• Avoids incremental or purely derivative contributions
  
  

2. Academic Rigor and Methodological Soundness (20%)

• Clear research design and well-defined objectives

• Appropriate methodology (quantitative, qualitative, mixed, theoretical, etc.)

• Valid data collection and analysis procedures

• Logical coherence and consistency in argumentation
  
  

3. Relevance and Contribution to the Field (20%)

• Strong alignment with conference themes (e.g., educational technology, AI, digital transformation, sustainability, etc.)

• Meaningful theoretical and/or practical contribution

• Potential for real-world impact or policy implications
  
  

4. Quality of Analysis and Discussion (15%)

• Depth of critical engagement with literature

• Clear interpretation of findings

• Insightful implications and limitations identified
  
  

5. Clarity, Structure, and Presentation (10%)

• Logical organization and academic writing quality

• Clear figures, tables, and supporting materials

• Adherence to conference formatting guidelines
  
  

6. Oral/Online Presentation Quality (10%)

• Clear and professional delivery

• Effective use of visuals

• Ability to respond thoughtfully to questions
  
  

7. Ethical Standards and Scholarly Integrity (5%)

• Compliance with ethical research standards

• Proper citation and referencing

• Absence of plagiarism or AI misuse

 © ETLTC & ACM Chapter on eLearning & Technical Communication: All Rights Reserved.