A proposal for a poster presentation should consist of an abstract (300 words at maximum) and an extended summary (1000 words at maximum, including references). The deadline for submitting your proposal is December 17th 2015. Your proposal will be accepted, rejected or offered an alternative presentation format. The decision will be e-mailed to you by February 1st 2016.
At the conference, posters are grouped conceptually. Each poster is introduced with a brief oral presentation (max. 3 minutes). After the introductions there is time to walk from poster to poster.
When your proposal is accepted as a poster presentation, you are requested to create a poster and submit it along with an updated abstract (300 words) by March 31st 2016. This abstract will be published in the conference proceedings.
You will receive feedback on your poster by a peer who also participates in the 20th JURE Conference. Furthermore, you will be requested to give feedback on a poster yourself. The feedback procedure is meant as an opportunity for improvement, not for summative assessment (the proposal has already been accepted).
You can find an example of a poster here. For further information see the poster guidelines below.
After a successful submission, you will receive a confirmation e-mail. If you decide not to participate in the conference, please inform us as soon as possible, since participants are matched to each other for peer feedback.
When submitting your poster, your name SHOULD NOT be stated in the document so that a double blind review process is possible.
As well as a paper presentation a poster should inform the audience about:
- Title and authors [Please omit this info when submitting your handout for the second phase of review, since a double-blind review process will be followed!]
- Research problem statement or objective of the project
- Hypothesis or research questions
- Method: A description of the sample, design, materials and procedure of the study
- Analyses of the study
- Most important results
- Major conclusions, theoretical and/or practical implications
A poster should be as self-explanatory as possible so that your main job is to supplement the information it contains. To reach this aim, make it clear, structured, concise, and attractive.
Clearness and structure
The title and authors’ names and affiliations should be at the top of the poster. Although there is room for flexibility, it is often useful to have panels indicating, for example, the aims of the research, the methods and subjects involved, and the material used. Other panels might highlight the most important results and the conclusions. Diagrams, graphs and tables can be used effectively to visualize results.
As space is very limited, be sure to present the most important information only and effectively. Don’t overcrowd the poster with too much data or too much text. The title and the conclusion are the most important “eye catchers”. They should say something such as "Teaching method A doubles the motivation of at-risk students”, as opposed to "The effects of a new teaching method on learners”. Make sure that the message you want to convey is transported by the information and not lost in it. Although concise, make sure you give the necessary theoretical information.
Be aware that your poster is viewed from a distance. Therefore, all text should be large enough to be read from a distance of about 1.5 m. The major titles/subtitles should be in large letters, at least 2-3 cm. There should be enough space between text lines (1.5 – 2 line spaces). You can use background colors (they should not distract) and arrangements of columns or rows to connect portions visually that are related conceptually. Such layouts help guide the audience through the poster.
The size of your poster should be ISO A0 in portrait format. Easels and pins will be provided. It is recommended that the presenter has a number of copies of the poster in the form of handouts in ISO A4 format (or the extended summary) to distribute to interested participants.
REVIEW CRITERIA FOR POSTERS DURING THE SECOND ROUND OF REVIEW