We have now finished the reviewing process for the "tips, techniques, and courseware" category. This year, we have received 20 submissions in this category, which I believe might be a record for ITiCSE. The largest number of entries in this category I could find in the previous online programs were 9, although this only reflects the accepted entries, not the submissions.
In a brief but intensive reviewing process, each submission received three reviews. The program had, based on previous years, reserved one session for this category (75 minutes), which would have given us enough time to accept between 4 and 7 submissions, depending on how much time each presentation was given. Our first large - and positive! - surprise was thus to receive 20 submissions. The second positive aspect was that at first glance, all 20 submissions were on topic, of interest, and of good quality. Within the reviewing process, four submission were identified that for one reason or another were not quite fitting and had to be rejected. This left us with 16 very interesting submissions, and the task to reject an additional 9 of them to bring us to the maximum 7 submissions - or find an alternative solution.
As you will find out in the online program, we focused on finding an alternative solution. We have taken a bold step in offering three parallel (but not related) "TT&C" on Wednesday. We have kept the original session on Tuesday, which will discuss ideas and insights in seven different presentations. Additionally, the three parallel sessions discuss improving computer architecture courses, tools and APIs, and supporting novice programmers. Each of these sessions contains three tips, and is placed directly between the Keynote by Mark Guzdial, and the coffee break and posters session - and thus in one of the best places.
We are looking forward to our attendees' feedback on this unusual new step. It would really have been a shame to be forced to accept any of these submissions - something I am sure you will agree with when you attend the conference!
In case you are wondering which of the 16 entries would otherwise have been selected, and which 9 ones we would otherwise have rejected... Please let me point out that these are spread out over the different (topical) sessions. The mathematically "obvious" assumption that we would have accepted the 7 submissions in the Tuesday session, and have rejected the contents of the Wednesday sessions, is not correct :-). IN fact, we quickly decided that we did not even want to pick out 9 submissions to reject, and focused on assigning sessions with a given topic, instead of assigning sessions by the submission "scores".
The online program has already been updated, including the online PDF and PNG renditions. Please check out the modifications, which I am sure only improve an already great program!