Abstract+evaluation

These were the criteria I used for the last conference one which I worked. What is missing?

- Relation to the conference theme - is the paper topic related to the conference theme? - is it going to contribute to the overall dialogue for the event? - will the paper contribute to a good balance of topics and approaches for the event?

-Writing -Is the presentation of the argument clear and concise -Does the abstract show evidence of the scholar's engagement/expertise on the topic

-Scholarship/Method -Is there a clear justification for the mode of theoretical/methodical approach -Is the intended method of presentation in line with the results projected -Is the use of research materials valid

-Originality -Is the material to be covered, as far as you know, a new contribution to the field -Is the scholar engaging with the theoretical or methodological literature in at least a sound way, and hopefully in a new, thoughtful and inventive way -Does the abstract mention the project's contribution to larger understanding of music, the conference topic, etc.

Presentability -Is the mode of intended presentation likely to appeal to a range of music and culture scholars -Is it possible for this scholar to present this argument well in 20 minutes -Do you trust this mode of argumentation and presentation for this argument