MERGA

2015 Conference Proceedings

2015 Conference Proceedings

2015 Full Conference Proceedings

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES

Exploring a Structure for Mathematics Lessons that Foster Problem Solving and Reasoning – Peter Sullivan, Nadia Walker, Chris Borcek, & Mick Rennie

Mathematics Education as a Field of Research: Have We Become Too Comfortable? – Tom Lowrie

Researching and Doing Professional Development Using a Shared Discursive Resource and an Analytic Tool – Jill Adler

 

BETH SOUTHWELL PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS AWARD

Teacher Actions to Facilitate Early Algebraic Reasoning – Jodie Hunter

 

RESEARCH PAPERS

The challenge of supporting a beginning teacher to plan in primary mathematics – Judy Bailey

Contemplating symbolic literacy of first year mathematics students – Caroline Bardini, Robyn Pierce, & Jill Vincent

Problematising Mathematics Education – Andy Begg

Identity as an Embedder-of-Numeracy: Identifying ways to support teachers to embed numeracy across the curriculum – Anne Bennison

Young Children’s Number Line Placements and Place-Value Understanding – Brenda Bicknell, & Jenny Young-Loveridge

The Role of Cultural Capital in Creating Equity for Pāsifika Learners in Mathematics – Trevor Bills, & Roberta Hunter

The importance of praxis in financial literacy education: An Indigenous perspective – Levon Blue, Peter Grootenboer, & Mark Brimble

Coming to do Mathematics in the Margins – Raymond Brown, & Trevor Redmond

“You play on them. They’re active.” Enhancing the mathematics learning of reluctant teenage students – Nigel Calder, & Anthony Campbell

CAS or Pen-and-paper: Factors that Influence Students’ Choices – Scott Cameron, & Lynda Ball

The Language Used to Articulate Content as an Aspect of Pedagogical Content Knowledge  – Helen Chick

Specialised Content Knowledge: Evidence of Pre-service Teachers’ Appraisal of Student Errors in Proportional Reasoning – Mohan Chinnappan, & Bruce White

Learning from Lessons: Studying the Construction of Teacher Knowledge Catalysed by Purposefully-designed Experimental Mathematics Lessons – Doug Clarke, David Clarke, Anne Roche, & Man Ching Esther Chan

Inclusive Practices in the Teaching of Mathematics: Supporting the Work of effective primary teachers – Barbara Clarke, & Rhonda Faragher

Supporting Students to Reason About the Relative Size of Proper and Improper Fractions – Jose Luis Cortina, & Jana Visnovska

Proportional Reasoning as Essential Numeracy – Shelley Dole, Annette Hilton, & Geoff Hilton

A Case Study of the Pedagogical Tensions in Teacher’s Questioning Practices When Implementing Reform-Based Mathematics Curriculum in China – Lianchun Dong, Wee Tiong Seah, & David Clarke

Improving the Effectiveness of Mathematics Teaching through Active Reflection – Kerryn Driscoll

Promoting Teacher Growth through Lesson Study: A Culturally Embedded Approach – Marlon Ebaeguin

The Self-Efficacy of students with Borderline, Mild and Moderate Intellectual Disabilities and their Achievements in Mathematics – Agbon Enoma, & John Malone

Identifying Core Elements of Argument-Based Inquiry in Primary Mathematics Learning – Jill Fielding-Wells

STEM Education: What Does Mathematics Have To Offer? – Noleine Fitzallen

The Challenge for Non-first-language-English Academic Publishing in English Language Research Outlets – Vince Geiger, & Rudolf Straesser

The Impact of Let’s Count on Children’s Mathematics Learning – Ann Gervasoni, & Bob Perry, & Linda Parish

Comparing the Development of Australian and German 7-Year-Old and 8-Year-Old’s Counting and Whole Number Learning – Ann Gervasoni, & Andrea Peter-Koop

Learning at the Boundaries – Merrilyn Goos

The Practice of ‘Middle Leading’ in Mathematics Education – Peter Grootenboer, Christine Edwards-Groves, & Karin Rönnerman

Teaching Computation in Primary School without Traditional Written Algorithms – Judy Hartnett

Calculating for probability: “He koretake te rima” (Five is useless) – Ngārewa Hāwera, & Merilyn Taylor

Students’ Relationships with Mathematics: Affect and Identity – Naomi Ingram

Using Alternative Multiplication Algorithms to ‘Offload’ Cognition – Dan Jazby, & Cath Pearn

Successful Mathematics Lessons in Remote Communities: A Case Study of Balargo – Robyn Jorgensen

Differentiated Success: Combining Theories to Explain Learning – Robyn Jorgensen, & Kevin Larkin

The Mathematics Instructional Leader: What a Difference Crucial Conversations Make – Janeen Lamb, Carmel Diezmann, & Jillian Fox

The Search for Fidelity in Geometry Apps: An Exercise in Futility? – Kevin Larkin

Pre-service teachers and numeracy in and beyond the classroom – Gilah C Leder, Helen J Forgasz, Natalie Kalkhoven, & Vince Geiger

Gender Differences in Mathematics Attitudes in Coeducational and Single Sex Secondary Education – Kester Lee, & Judy Anderson

Developing a Theoretical Framework to Assess Taiwanese Primary Students’ Geometric Argumentation – Tsu-Nan Lee

Starting a Conversation about Open Data in Mathematics Education Research – Tracy Logan

A snapshot of young children’s mathematical competencies: Results from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children – Amy MacDonald, & Colin Carmichael

Examining PCK in a Senior Secondary Mathematics Lesson – Nicole Maher, Tracey Muir, & Helen Chick

Teacher’s Scaffolding over the Year to Develop Norms of Mathematical Inquiry in a Primary Classroom – Katie Makar, Arthur Bakker, & Dani Ben-Zvi

Middle Years Students Influencing Local Policy – Margaret Marshman

Early Years Teachers’ Perspectives on Teaching through Multiple Metaphors and Multimodality – Paula Mildenhall

Young Indigenous Students’ Engagement with Growing Pattern Tasks: A Semiotic Perspective – Jodie Miller

Professional Knowledge Required when Teaching Mathematics for Numeracy in the Multiplicative Domain – Judith Mills

Determining a Student’s Optimal Learning Zone in Light of the Swiss Cheese Model   Patricia Morley & Simone Zmood

Student and Parent Perspectives on Fipping the Mathematics Classroom – Tracey Muir

Authority and Agency in Young Children’s Early Number Work: A Functional Linguistic Perspective – Carol Murphy

Examples in the Teaching of Mathematics: Teachers’ Perceptions – Lay Keow Ng, & Jaguthsing Dindyal

How Inquiry Pedagogy Enables Teachers to Facilitate Growth Mindsets in Mathematics Classrooms – Mia O’Brien, Katie Makar, Jill Fielding-Wells, & Jude Hillman

Challenging the Mindset of Sammy: A Case Study of a Grade 3 Mathematically Highly Capable Student – Linda Parish

Facebook as a Learning Space: An Analysis from a Community of Practice Perspective – Sitti Maesuri Patahuddin, & Tracy Logan

Strategies for Solving Fraction Tasks and Their Link to Algebraic Thinking – Catherine Pearn, & Max Stephens

Mentoring to Alleviate Anxiety in Pre-Service primary mathematics Teachers: an orientation towards improvement rather than evaluation – Timothy Perkins

Spatial Visualisation and Cognitive Style: How Do Gender Differences Play Out? – Ajay Ramful, & Tom Lowrie

The Practice of Teacher Aides in Tasmanian Primary Mathematics Classrooms – Robyn Reaburn

Qualitative Facets of Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Diagnostic Proceeding: Collecting and Interpreting in One-on-one Interviews – Simone Reinhold

Describing the nature and effect of teacher interactions with students during seat work on challenging tasks – Anne Roche, & Doug Clarke

Teachers’ talk about Robotics: Where is the Mathematics? – Annie Savard, & Kate Highfield

Teaching Statistics in Middle School Mathematics classrooms: Making Links with Mathematics but Avoiding Statistical Reasoning – Annie Savard, & Dominic Manuel

Context counts: The potential of realistic problems to expose and extend social and mathematical understandings – Carly Sawatzki

Theorising about Mathematics Teachers’ Professional Knowledge: The Content, Form, Nature, and Course of Teachers’ Knowledge – Thorsten Scheiner

Understanding Geometric Ideas: Pre-service Primary Teachers’ Knowledge as a Basis for Teaching – Rebecca Seah

Mathematical Language Development and Talk Types in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environments – Duncan Symons, & Robyn Pierce

The Individual Basic Facts Assessment Tool – Sandi Tait-McCutcheon, & Michael Drake

Affording and Constraining Local Moral Orders in Teacher-Led Ability-Based Mathematics Groups – Sandi Tait-McCutcheon, Joanna Higgins, Mary Jane Shuker, & Judith Loveridge

Exploring relationship between scientific reasoning skills and mathematics problem solving – Nor’ain Mohd Tajudin, & Mohan Chinnappan

Developing Adaptive Expertise with Pasifika Learners in an Inquiry Classroom – Zain Thompson, & Jodie Hunter

Getting out of Bed: Students’ Beliefs – Jane Watson, & Rosemary Callingham

Improving Student Motivation and Engagement in Mathematics Through One-to-one Interactions – Jennifer Way, Amelia Reece, Janette Bobis, Judy Anderson, & Andrew Martin

A Cross-cultural Comparison of Parental Expectations for the Mathematics Achievement of their Secondary School Students – Daya Weerasinghe, & Debra Panizzon

“I was in year 5 and I failed maths”: Identifying the Range and Causes of Maths Anxiety in first year Pre-service Teachers – Sue Wilson

Enhancing Mathematics (STEM) Teacher Education in Regional Australia: Pedagogical Interactions and Affect – Geoff Woolcott, & Tony Yeigh

Mathematics, Programming, and STEM – Andy Yeh, & Vinesh Chandra

 

RESEARCH PRESENTATION ABSTRACTS

Laying the Foundation for Proportional Reasoning – Ann Downton

The Development and Evaluation of an Individualised Learning Tool for Mathematics students with Intellectual Disability: IMPELS – Agbon Enoma, & John Malone

Capturing Mathematical Learning in an Inquiry Context: There are Some Things Not Easily Measured – Kym Fry

Teacher Professional Growth through using a Critical Mass Mentoring System: Effective Whole School Teacher Professional Development – Judy Hartnett, & Jim Midgley

Anatomy of a Mathscast – Carola Hobohm, & Linda Galligan

An Exploration of Strategies That Teachers Use When Teaching Beginning Algebra – Christina Lee, & Christine Ormond

Factors Influencing Social Process of Statistics Learning within an IT Environment – Ken W. Li, & Merrilyn Goos

Identifying categories of Pre-service Teachers’ Mathematical Content Knowledge – Sharyn Livy

Using Drawings and Discussion to Prompt Young Learners to Reflect Upon and Describe Their Mathematical Understandings – Andrea McDonough, & Jill Cheeseman

Language and Mathematics: Exploring a New Model to Teach in Bi/Multilingual Mathematics Classroom – Charly Muke

Exploring the Influence of Early Numeracy Understanding Prior to School on Mathematics Achievement at the End of Grade 2 – Andrea Peter-Koop, & Sebastian Kollhoff

An Irish Response to an International Concern:Challenges to Mathematics Teaching – Lisa O’Keeffe, Olivia Fitzmaurice, & Patrick Johnson

An Analysis of Modelling Process based on McLuhan’s Media Theory: Focus on Constructions by Media in Cases of Using Geoboard – Hiro Ozasa

The Knowledge Dimension of Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy for Integration – Farzad Radmehr, Robin Averill, & Michael Drake

Developing an analysing tool for dynamic mathematics-related student interaction regarding affect, cognition and participation – Laura Tuohilampi

Thinking Strategies Used by 7th-Grade Students in Solving Number Sense Problems – Palanisamy Veloo, & Parmjit Singh

 

SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

A Focus Question Approach to the Teaching of Mathematics – John Ley

A Problem Solving Lesson: Pre-service Teachers Initiation to Lesson Study – Jaguthsing Dindyal

Breaking down Barriers – Peter Howley

Building upon the Language Model of Mathematics – Harry Kanasa & Kevin Larkin

Changing Practices in Indigenous Communities – Kay Owens & Charly Muke

Conceptual Connectivity in Mathematics – Joanne Mulligan & Geoff Woolcott

Examining a Students’ Resource for Reconstructing the Limit Concept at Need: A Structural Abstraction Perspective – Thorsten Scheiner & Márcia M. F. Pinto

Exploring Students’ Views on using iPads in Mathematics – Janelle Hill

Mapping school students’ aspirations for STEM careers – Kathryn Holmes, Adam Lloyd, Jenny Gore, & Max Smith

Mathematical Thinking in a Context of ‘General Thinking’: Implications for Mathematics Education – Corinne Miller, Geoff Woolcott, & Christos Markopoulos

Paternal influence on school students’ aspirations for STEM careers – Adam Lloyd, Jenny Gore, & Max Smith

Pre-service Teachers’ Views on Mathematics Homework Practices – Sven Trenholm, & Mohan Chinnappan

Primary-Middle Pre-Service Teachers reported use of the Mathematics Textbook – Lisa O’Keeffe

Promoting Financial Literacy in Pre-service Teacher Education through On-line Modules – Leigh Wood, Carmel Coady, Joanne Mulligan, Michael Cavanagh, & Damian Bridge

Promoting the Development of Foundation Content Knowledge in all Primary Pre-service Teachers – Chris Linsell, Naomi Ingram, & Megan Anakin

Teachers’ Beliefs about Knowledge of Content and Students and its Effect on their Practice – Vesife Hatısaru

Teaching out-of-field: Meanings, representations and silences – Colleen Vale, Linda Hobbs, Christopher Speldewinde, & Zahra Parvanehnezhadshirazian

The Australian Mathematics Competition: What’s the Score? – Andrew Kepert, & Mike Clapper

The Pattern and Structure of the Australian Curriculum-Mathematics – Catherine McCluskey, Joanne Mulligan, & Michael Mitchelmore

Understanding Mathematics: Teacher Knowledge, Task Design and Evaluating Students’ Mathematical Reasoning – Christine Mae, Janette Bobis, & Jenni Way

 

ROUND TABLE

Investigating Mathematical Inquiry – Katie Makar, Jill Fielding-Wells, Kym Fry, Sue Allmond, & Jude Hillman

Promoting Positive Emotional Engagement in Mathematics of Prospective Primary Teachers  – Joanna Higgins, & Janette Bobis

Senior Secondary Students’ Pre-calculus and Calculus Understanding  – Michael Jennings, & Peter Adams

Working Across Disciplinary Boundaries in Pre-service Teacher Education – Merrilyn Goos, Judy Anderson, Jo Balatti, Kim Beswick, Tricia Forrester, & Jenni Way

Short Communications & Round Tables

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a short communication or round table to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the abstracts which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the abstract submission

Submissions not exceeding one page are required for short communications and round tables. The submissions must be prepared using the conference template, and can include essential references. They will be reviewed by the Editorial Team and, if accepted, will be published in the conference proceedings as one-page abstracts (not as papers). Presenters are invited to prepare a paper for distribution at the conference, but these papers will not be included in the proceedings.

Short communications are suitable for reports on research in mathematics education that do not fully meet the requirements for published papers. These might include works in preliminary stages, reports of pilot projects, initial reviews of literature, ideas or suggestions for future study, and briefer discussions of particular issues. Short communications allow new researchers to obtain feedback on projects in a constructive and supportive environment, and foster the building of links between researchers with similar interests.

Short communications are presented by author(s) only, allocated half of the time for research reports (in past, this was 20 minutes). At least 5 minutes is to be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Round tables are suitable for presenters seeking involved interaction with the audience in relation to their research or topic of interest in mathematics education, and for those sharing their insights and advice with the early career colleagues. These might include discussion of an emerging topic, co-analysis of provided student work, solving a mathematical task, or discussing the demands and benefits of reviewing for high quality journals. Round tables allow finding peers with similar research interests, exploration of new research avenues, and building the capacity of MERGA community.

Round tables are led by author(s) only, allocated the same time as research reports (in past, this was 40 minutes). The abstracts should make clear the interactive element of the proposed activity, with no more than 15 min of the session time in a presentation mode.

Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award (BSPIA) recognises high-quality mathematics education that produces insights for the teaching profession and/or student learning.

The award consists of $500 and a plaque to be presented at the Conference.

Nomination process 

There are two ways a paper can be nominated for the BSPIA:

  • Self-nomination: When you submit your conference paper, check the box that asks if you would like to apply for the BSPIA.
  • Nomination via peer-review: Anyone who submits a Conference paper for peer-review will be considered for nomination by the reviewers. 

Single and co-authored papers are eligible for consideration.

When you write your paper, please ensure that you observe all general paper submission requirements including the maximum page length.

Judging process

Submissions must be deemed eligible for publication in the Conference proceedings by the initial reviewing panel. Submissions accepted for presentation only will be excluded from consideration.

The judging panel will consist of two MERGA members and two AAMT nominees and will be chaired by the VP Development.

The judging criteria are:

  • Identification of a persistent and significant research problem
  • Synthesis of recent research literature and relevant policy initiatives
  • Robust methodology producing valid, reliable findings
  • Insightful discussion of practical implications for the teaching profession and/or student learning
  • Clear, succinct style of academic writing

Winners are notified four weeks prior to the Conference and are invited to present a keynote at the annual conference.

The Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award page on this website provides further information, including the history of the award and recent winners.  

Research Papers

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research paper to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template – to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website
  • MERGA Publication Agreement – to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission

Research papers can take two major forms: 

1. Reports of empirical investigations 

When empirical investigations are reported (such as in an experimental intervention, confirmatory study, or action research, etc.), the paper should also include

  • a statement of rationale for methodologies used in collecting and analysing data;
  • a critical discussion of data findings in the light of the research literature; and
  • in the literature review, prior work in the area should be acknowledged and an explanation of how the work reported in the paper builds on that earlier work should be included.

2. Reports that are not based on empirical research including:

  • a theoretical discussion;
  • a position paper;
  • a report of scholarly enquiry in progress;
  • a literature review, a meta-study;
  • an account of a new initiative;
  • a reflective critique of practice; or
  • any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms.

When the work is a theoretical discussion, a position paper, a report of scholarly inquiry in progress, a review of literature, a theoretical study, a meta-study, an account of a new initiative, a reflective critique of practice or any mixture of these or other recognised scholarly forms, the material presented must be discussed critically, and alternative points of view relating to themes presented should be appropriately argued.
It is expected that presenting authors will have 40 minutes to present their work at the conference. At least 10 minutes must be allowed to field questions and comments from the audience.

Structure of research papers – All papers for publication in the conference proceedings should contain the following:

  • a statement of the problem/issue and a discussion of its significance;
  • a critical analysis of the research literature as it relates to the topic of the paper; and
  • conclusions and implications for mathematics education derived from the study.

All papers must respect MERGA’s ethical guidelines relating to research work. Papers should not be more than the set length. In addition, papers must be: readable; free of grammatical, spelling and typographical errors; and adhere strictly to style requirements advertised by the conference proceedings Editorial Team.

Originality – Only research papers that are substantially different from work that has been published previously will be considered for publication in the conference proceedings and/or presentation at the conference.

Reviewing of research papers – Research papers will be blind reviewed by a panel of peers approved by the conference committee. The main purpose of the refereeing process is to contribute to the growth and development of quality practice in mathematics education research. Thus reviewers are asked to assist authors by providing helpful feedback and to comment on the suitability of papers for presentation at the conference. Accordingly, it will not be assumed that published papers presented at the conference will be as polished as articles in scholarly journals. Referees will be asked to assess papers being reviewed against the accepted norms for scholarly works presented at MERGA conferences, as set out above.

Each conference proceedings’ Editorial Team will exercise discretion over the reviewing process. Reviewers’ comments will be returned to the authors. Authors whose papers are not accepted for publication may be invited by the editorial panel to present their paper at the conference as a Short Communication, with a 1-page abstract (which they will be invited to provide) being published in the proceedings. Papers may be rejected outright, with no opportunity for presentation at the conference in an alternative form.

Research Symposia

The following documents are essential to read and complete when considering submitting a research symposium to the MERGA conference (available in the Submission section of this website).

  • MERGA Paper Template (to be used to write the papers which are then submitted to the MERGA conference website)
  • MERGA Publication Agreement (to be submitted on the MERGA conference website at the time of the paper submission)

Presentation of groups of published papers related by theme in the form of a research symposium is encouraged. The symposium forum will be particularly suitable for presentations relating to a single large project or presentations that explore topical themes from different and/or related perspectives. Special Interest Groups [SIGs] are encouraged to consider the symposium option as a means for sharing and discussing current research.

A symposium should consist of no more than four presentations of about 15 minutes duration each. The written papers should be half the length of research papers as described for research papers. Both research report types – empirical or non-empirical – are acceptable as published symposium papers.

A brief overview of the symposium (limit one page), including a symposium title, an introduction to the theme/project, and a short introduction to each of the 3-4 contributions, must be submitted with the set of short papers. Please list the symposium convenors as the authors on the first page, and name the paper authors in the text description.

The symposium proposer will also nominate a person to chair the symposium, and a discussant can also be named if desired. This information should accompany the collection of papers submitted for review.

The set of symposium papers (and the overview) will be blind reviewed by a review panel. The main purpose of the reviews is the same as for published papers, and the same criteria are used. The reviewers will be asked to consider the cohesiveness of the set of symposium papers. They will indicate whether the symposium as a whole, and each paper within it, should be “accepted”, “rejected” or if it “requires revision”. If it is deemed that one, some or all of the papers are in need of revision, the reviewers will outline which papers need to be revised and provide suggestions for the required changes. When the revisions are made, the symposium papers will be re-submitted and the set of papers will be sent to the same review panel for further consideration. As with research papers, the final decision about which symposium papers will be published is at the discretion of the Editorial Team.

The date for submission of the collection of symposium papers is the same as for Early Bird papers. This date has been set for the benefit of the group of authors of symposia papers. Should the symposium papers require revision, the authors will have the time to make the corrections and resubmit the set of symposium papers to be re-reviewed by the original reviewers.

Presentation of symposia: Symposia are presented by author(s) only, usually within a 90 min block. At least 10 minutes must be allocated for audience questions and open discussion.

Early Career Research Award

In order to encourage new researchers in mathematics education, MERGA sponsors an award to an author in the early part of her/his career. The award, for excellence in writing and presenting a piece of mathematics education research, consists of a plaque and a prize of $500 and is presented at the annual conference. 

Applying for the award

Entry for the Early Career Research Award is by submission of a written paper for presentation at the conference through the Early Bird process. Conditions of eligibility, information about the judging process, and the criteria judges will observe are indicated below. If you are applying for the Early Career Research Award, please ensure that when you upload your paper on the conference website, you also send an email to the Conference Secretariat indicating that you are an entrant for the Early Career Research Award. Note that at some MERGA conferences there is also a form to complete or a box to tick on the registration form, so check the conference website carefully. Please note that co-authored papers ARE NOT eligible for entry into the Early Career Research Award, nor are Round Table or Symposium papers.

Rules and eligibility for the Early Career Award

The Early Career Research Award page on this website provides further information about this award, including a list of recent winners.

Early Bird Review Process

The Early Bird review process is a form of mentoring, principally for new researchers. However, anyone is eligible to make use of it. Research papers submitted through the Early Bird process must be received by the Early Bird due date (i.e., the closing date in January). They must meet the requirements as set out for MERGA Research Papers. Early Bird papers should be uploaded following a link on the conference website. Authors will be asked to create a login into Oxford Abstracts (our conference management system) and submit the blinded file (anonymised) in the correct template for review.

Early Bird papers undergo a double-blind MERGA reviewing process. There are three possible outcomes of the review, and actions the authors need to follow.

  1. When the paper is accepted (for presentation at the conference and publication in the proceedings), the authors will be asked to provide their full unblinded manuscript and publication agreement.
  2. When small revisions are required, the revised papers will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March. The changes are considered by the editors, and the papers are not usually sent out for review again. The editors decide whether the paper is accepted for publication as well as presentation at the conference.
  3. When more major revisions are required, the reviewers will provide the author/s with feedback on how to how to strengthen the paper. The paper will need to be resubmitted by the main submission deadline in March, and it will be sent out for a new double-blind review.

Authors are notified of the outcome as soon as possible (usually within a few weeks, and in time for resubmission). Letters are sent to authors to indicate (a) accepted for publication, (b) small revisions required, (c) or major rewriting required.