Session review criteria

Useful questions to keep in mind when writing and reviewing session proposals, are:
  • Who will be interested in this topic? Would you go to this session?
  • Is the session description clear and inviting? Will it attracted its intended audience?
  • What prior knowledge is expected of participants?
  • What value will this session bring to its participants and organizers?
  • Why is this subject relevant to agile & beyond?
  • How does this session fit the conference?
  • What's innovative and unusual about the session, the topic, the format, ...?
  • Does the session also address why things (don't) work as they do and not just 'what' and 'how'?
  • What is the goal of the session?
  • Is the session structured in such a way that the goal of the session can be reached?
  • Is the timetable realistic?
  • How does the session format facilitate learning?
  • What are the expected results and outputs of the session? Can these be communicated to people who were not at the session?
We strive to make the process open and transparent and involve the community in the process. There's however no such thing as a completely objective selection process. We can state criteria for sessions to be acceptable, but acceptance depends on more than that alone, like ensuring a balanced program suitable for the audience. We apply a number of global criteria for this purpose:
  • balance between experienced presenters and people new to presenting at conferences
  • diversity of presenters; mix of new and experienced presenters
  • balanced mix of beginners and advanced sessions; presenters from different countries
  • diversity of topics, covering technical stuff, process, management,
  • balance between real world experiences, tools/techniques, innovative ideas
  • max. 2 sessions per presenter, max. 1 session per presenter per day