The total number of proposals accepted to Network 11 was 88. This represented an increase of 12.88% in relation to ECER 2011.
Eighty proposals were accepted to be presented at ECER 2012. This represents an increase of 6.66% in relation to the previous conference (ECER 2012).
Fourteen reviewers assessed submissions Reviewers were from the following seven countries: Belgium, Czech, Germany, Latvia, Mexico, Scotland and Spain. Every submission was evaluated by two reviewers.
Proposals presented in different sessions of ECER 2012 as follows:
- 3 proposals were presented at a workshop
- 9 proposals were presented at 2 symposia: one symposium with 5 papers from 5 different countries; the other symposium with 4 papers from 4 different countries)
- 6 proposals were presented as posters
- 52 proposals were presented at papers session
The number of sessions was the following one:
- 1 workshop (with 3 presenters)
- 2 symposia (with 9 presentations in total)
- 1 session of posters (with 6 presentations)
- 22 sessions with paper presentations (with 52 presenters)
- 1 network meeting (presented by the link convenor)
Presenters of workshops, symposia, posters and papers came from the following 32 countries:
Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Croatia, Czech, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Herzegovina, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom, and USA.
The three presenters at the workshop were from the USA.
The five presenters at one symposium were from the following five countries:
Israel, Latvia, Mexico, Scotland and Spain. Session chair was from Latvia; discussant was from Scotland.
The four presenters at the other symposium were from the following four countries:
Azerbaijan, Croatia, Estonia and Herzegovina. Session chair was from Herzegovina; discussant was from Estonia.
The six presenters of posters were from the following three countries:
One from Norway, four from Spain and one from Germany.
The 52 presenters at paper session were from the following countries:
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and United Kingdom.
The number of attendees per session was ranged from six to 20. Most frequently repeated number of attendees per session was 11-20.
Attendees at workshops, symposia and paper sessions came from the following countries:
Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Croatia, Czech, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Herzegovina, Hungary, Iceland, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Scotland, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, United Kingdom and USA.
Rooms were available during sessions. All of had enough space and the temperature was pleasant, except for the first session (as they did not yet have air conditioning). The seating arrangements were good and the light was sufficient.
Equipment was available in every session. The computer and the rest of technical equipment worked perfectly well. The software was compatible with the computers in every presentation.
The timing of sessions worked out perfectly. Presentations were well-paced and there was enough time for every presentation and discussion.
Language of communication did not offer difficulties in general, especially during presentations. Communication language (in English) was reasonably good, even somehow better than last year. Sometimes there was difficulty with comprehension during debates or answers to questions.
37% of presenters gave a hand-out to attendees; some presenters promised attendees that they would send them copies by email.
One network meeting was held as session 11 (without parallel sessions) on September 20th, from 17:15 to 18:45. Eighteen people attended the network meeting.
According to the announced agenda, the topics discussed during the network meeting session were as follows:
- Acknowledgement of presenters, reviewers, chairs and discussants
- Collaborative research on ‘Leadership and Quality of Education’: purpose and objectives; members and collaborators; research guide; collection of empirical data; group website; articles and information to be inserted into the website; possible topics to be researched; collaboration with some specialised journals
- Functioning of network 11 evaluation: session functioning; presenter attendance; session attendees; degree of satisfaction; other comments
- Proposals to EERA Council and to promote network 11
- Publication of papers from ECER 2011 in process
- Publication of papers from ECER 2012
- Requirements of papers from ECER 2012 to be published
- Reviewers of submissions and chairs of sessions for ECER 2013.
- Double reviewing of submissions
- Network structure: link convenor; adjunct link convenor; network secretary; convenors; reviewers; chairs
- ECER 2013 preparation to submit to network 11: symposia, workshops, round tables, papers, posters
- Other themes
Attendees at the network meeting expressed their gratitude to the EERA for the help offered, to the ECER local committee, as well as to members and collaborators from University of Cádiz. Attendees at the network meeting acknowledged that members or collaborators from the University and of the local committee were generally on hand to help solve problems of conference participants and attendees.
The network coordinating network, reviewers, chairs, discussants, presenters and attendees expressed their satisfaction with having been able to attend ECER 2012. Particular thanks was made to the members of the EERA Office, to the EERA in general and University of Cádiz.
A network dinner was held after the network meeting:
Around 39 people attended the dinner. Most of them were members or participants in network 11 activities, but there were some participants from other networks and even some friends who did not participate at this conference.
Dinner was held at a nice restaurant ‘El Chato’, between Cádiz and San Fernando.
Dinner participants expressed their satisfaction with having enjoyed a wonderful personal atmosphere and delicious food of high quality. People from different countries enjoyed their friendly relationship. Most of those attending became good friends of colleagues. Most of the participants expressed their wish to continue this friendly mutual relationship and their purpose of participating in works or projects promoted by members of this network 11.