Important Dates

Full Paper
Submission Deadline:

16 March 2018

Notification to authors:
16 April 2018

Camera ready version
7 May 2018

Author Registration and Payment Deadline:
14 May 2018

Conference dates:
14 and 15 June 2018

Committees

General chair
Jürgen Mottok

Co-Chair
Dieter Landes
Hans Gruber

International
Program Committee

Jörg Abke
Jürgen Börstler
Philipp Brune
Mark Cieliebak
Ernesto Damiani
Marcus Deininger
Georg Hagel
Martin Hobelsberger
Eileen Kraemer
Martin Kropp
Matthias Längrich
Thomas Lehmann
Vaclav Matousek
Elisabeth Meilhammer
Susana Muñoz Hernández
Michael Niemetz
Arnold Pears
Kerstin Raudonat
Maria-Ribera Sancho
Jörn Schlingensiepen
Peter Sommerlad
Friedhelm Stappert
Reimer Studt
Thanwadee Sunetnanta
Nasseh Tabrizi
Ye Tao
Ramin Tavakoli Kolagari
Horia-Nicolai Teodorescu
Amir Tomer
Gero Wedemann
Goetz Winterfeldt
Christian Wolff

Organizer

Learning of Software Engineering - Registered Association

Preparation of Contributions

Authors must use the new ACM Master Proceedings Template for submissions.

Latex and Microsoft Word templates are available for download at this link:

www.acm.org/publications/proceedings-template

 

 

Submission of Contributions

Papers will be accepted only by electronic submission through the conference submission server: there you can create an account and submit your contribution .

Page limits include all text, references, appendices, and figures. We solicit high-quality submissions for this track in the following categories:

  • Full papers,
    10-15 pages in the LNCS/CCIS one-column page format, documenting results and findings, where the research presented has followed established research methods;

  • Short papers,
    up to 5 pages, reporting novel results that have not been fully evaluated;

Papers should be submitted in PDF format through Easy Chair.

Conference Proceedings
All accepted regular papers, full and short papers on Software Engineering Education will be published as Conference Proceedings.

Note that at least one author must register for the conference until the author registration deadline in order for the final version of the paper to be published in the conference proceedings.

 

 

 

 

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

1. Obligations of Authors

  • A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
  • The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
  • Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported work.
  • All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

2. Obligations of Reviewers

  • All submitted papers are subject to double-blind review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the paper.
  • The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, significance, originality, readability and language.
  • The possible decisions include acceptance or rejection.
  • Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  • Articles may be rejected without review if they are obviously not suitable for publication.
  • The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  • The reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • The staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents and are reviewed by anonymous staff.
  • A reviewer should also call to the publisher's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.