Call For Submissions

Although we will accept submissions on any topic related to engineering education, we particularly welcome contributions related to the central theme of the conference “Shaping the Future: Creativity and Innovation in Engineering Education”, as well as contributions that explore one or more of the sub-themes below.

Submissions should address the critical challenges and innovative strategies that are reshaping the landscape of engineering education. Authors will be asked to self-categorize their work into one or more of the following sub-themes as part of the submission process, to aid in organizing sessions. Please note that as a new practice for our conferences, these session themes (those not labelled as a special theme) will be recurring, and you can expect to see them return each year, to better help members plan their work.

• Special 2026 theme: Creativity and Innovation in Engineering Education
• Special 2026 theme: Experiences of Small Engineering Schools
• Student Assessment
• Program Evaluation & Accreditation
• Instruction & Pedagogy (incl. educational technology and Open Education Resources)
• Engineering Design (incl. design education, design thinking, design principles, etc.)
• First Year Programs
• Student Learning & Development (incl. theories and processes of student learning)
• Curriculum Design
• Recruitment & Retention
• Outreach & Community Engagement
• Social and Environmental Impact & Sustainability
• Equity, Diversity & Inclusion
• Professional Skills (incl. communication, leadership, entrepreneurship, systems thinking, ethics)
• Professional Practice & Industry Engagement (incl. career pathways, workplace culture, co-op, industry engagement, etc.)
• Philosophy of Engineering and Engineering Education (incl. broader perspectives on the ontological and epistemological development of engineering and engineering education as disciplines)
• Research Methods (incl. specific methods and data collection approaches in engineering education)

Submissions can be made for presentations (typically accompanied by a full paper), discussed in the next section, or for discussions (workshops, collaboratoriums, or panels), discussed further below.

Authors may choose to submit a full paper (5-8 pages, not including references and appendices) for publication in the Conference Proceedings, or not to submit a paper. Authors of submissions can present their work in the following formats:

• Podium Talks (12 minutes presentation + 8 minutes Q&A): These sessions allow authors to provide a concise overview of their larger or more in-depth work using presentation slides, followed by audience questions. Authors whose Podium Talks are accepted will need to submit a full paper.
• Lightning Talks (5 minutes presentation + 5 minutes Q&A): This fast-paced format focuses on presenting key ideas and results, ideal for smaller-scale, high-quality completed work, as well as works-in-progress or early-stage research. Submission of a full paper for publication in the CEEA-ACÉG proceedings is optional, but strongly encouraged, for those requesting this type of presentation.
• Poster Presentation: Ideal for extended, interactive discussions between presenters and attendees. Posters should visually convey ideas and results. Authors can also opt to submit a full paper for publication in the proceedings.

We are fortunate to have an increasing number of submissions each year to our annual conference. In an effort to ensure that attendees can see a greater breadth of work by scheduling a reduced number of parallel sessions, we will be shifting our mix of talk lengths. At the 2026 Conference, more submissions will be offered lightning talks and fewer podium talks will be scheduled. Although we will do our best to accommodate everyone’s requests, priority for podium talks will be given to works where data collection and analysis is complete at the abstract stage and for larger or more in-depth works of broad interest. Lightning talks will be offered to many high-quality submissions, including smaller-scale completed work with full papers. We appreciate everyone’s flexibility so that we can plan an exciting, manageable conference program for you.

Authors are invited to submit a structured abstract (up to 500 words, excluding references) in either English or French via Oxford Abstracts by November 17, 2025. To meet the requirements of Scopus indexing, an English version of the abstract and the title is required. All submissions will go through a double-blind peer review process. Please ensure that no identifiable information is included in the structured abstract.

As a new approach this year, there are three tracks for submissions, instead of our usual two. Please read the description of each track carefully. All tracks are considered equal and have no bearing on the review process or on the allocation of presentation formats. Authors will determine the track that they will submit to. The three tracks are designed to better reflect the diversity of research methodologies, of pedagogical approaches, and of scholarship in the work of our members. All submissions must address issues in engineering education.

1. “Practice” track – The primary goal of this track is to share an educational practice implemented in engineering courses, co-curricular activities, or engineering programs. These practices can take place inside or outside engineering classrooms. They can be educational interventions already implemented, or the design of a new educational method or tool for engineering students (but not yet implemented). They can also be about a new practice related to your role as an educator. These practices do not need to be entirely novel to engineering education communities but their description in the submission must be grounded in relevant literature to demonstrate that these practices make a valuable contribution to knowledge. Submissions in this track must include a clear goal and/or inquiry question related to the practice involved and a critical reflection on the practice. Papers in this track are strongly encouraged to include empirical evidence addressing success, failure, and/or challenges related to the practice. Authors who report data collected from human participants (e.g., students, faculty, staff, community members) must demonstrate compliance with their institution’s research ethics policies. See more details in the “Submission Involving Human Participants’ section.
2. “Research” track – Papers in this track should involve systematic inquiry into topics in engineering education. These topics can include, but not limited to, how engineering is learned and taught; advancing equity, inclusion, and decolonization; evaluating educational outcomes and career readiness; and understanding the experiences and development of students and faculty. Papers in this track must be grounded in relevant literature, with an identified theoretical or conceptual framework; research questions; and appropriate methods that engage qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods data, and that demonstrate sound research design. Authors who report data collected from human participants (e.g., students, faculty, staff, community members) must include the number of the research protocol approved by their institution’s research ethics board in their final paper.
3. “Conceptual paper” track – Submissions to this track are dedicated to discussing conceptual matters related to engineering education. Authors can present a position or idea that has seen limited discussion or is part of an ongoing conversation in engineering education. The discussion of these conceptual matters can be based on existing theoretical perspectives, evidence-based observations of practice, or a review of the literature. Arguments in these papers must be sufficiently grounded in associated literature. Systematic or scoping literature review papers should be submitted to this track. Papers in this track are expected to demonstrate significance of the topic, use of scholarly literature, adequacy of interpretations, and coherence in conceptualization. Papers in this track typically do not report results collected from human participants; however, if authors did include empirical data they collected to support their arguments, they must demonstrate that their work complies with their institution’s research ethics policies.

Include three to five keywords for each submission, considering the context/focus/topic, purpose/target/motivation, and research approach. Authors are encouraged to select keywords from the Engineering Education Research Taxonomy (Regents of the University of Michigan, 2013, https://taxonomy.engin.umich.edu/taxonomy/), when appropriate, but may choose their own keywords as needed.

According to the Tri-Council Policy Statement, research involving data collected from human participants (e.g., use of survey responses, interviews, student grades, audio/video recordings of humans, students’ responses to learning assessments, and collecting data from devices placed on human participants) must receive institutional ethics approval, unless this requirement is exempted by the authors’ institutional research ethics board (REB). It is the authors’ responsibility to consult with their institutional REB to ensure that their submission complies with their institutional research ethics policies. Refer to the Abstract Guidelines for more instructions.

These sessions typically run for about 90 minutes and include the following presentation modes:

• Panel Discussion – These sessions facilitate active conversation between presenters and audiences from diverse backgrounds. During proposal submission, authors will need to identify and propose at least three other panelists and a moderator. The submission should focus on the plan for moderating audience interaction. Each panelist will have opening and closing remarks, between which longer discussions occur within the panel and with the audience. Authors are encouraged to select discussion topics that are closely related to the conference theme and streams. We also encourage submissions from the CEEA-ACÉG Special Interest Groups.
• Collaboratorium (Unconference) – These sessions typically consist of roundtable facilitated group discussions on a topic presented by organizers. Typically, there are 3-5 roundtable discussions happening in parallel in the same room with interconnected topics. Notes are taken, and after a select amount of time, participants are directed to move to another roundtable. These sessions help participants brainstorm about the topics and enable the free flow of thoughts from participants with diverse backgrounds. Authors are encouraged to select discussion topics that are closely relevant to the conference theme and streams. We also encourage submissions from the CEEA-ACÉG Special Interest Groups.
• Workshops – The CEEA-ACÉG 2026 Organizing Committee invites proposals for workshops addressing relevant practices, issues, or technologies related to teaching/learning practices and engineering education research. Workshops will be delivered on Sunday June 14, 2026. Workshop spaces are limited, and we cannot guarantee acceptance of all submissions. Hence, while proposing a workshop, presenters are encouraged to consider alignment with the conference theme, streams, or CEEA-ACÉG Special Interest Group topics. Workshops must be centred on active participation.

To propose a session, please submit the Panel/Collaboratorium/Workshop Questionnaire via Oxford Abstracts by Monday January 5, 2026.

• Panels: The questionnaire will ask moderators/organizers to describe the panel format, biographies and credentials of the panelists (not anonymized), a description of the topic to be addressed and the topic’s relevance to the conference themes, and samples of the questions the panelists will address. Panel proposals will be evaluated based on overall quality, fit to the conference, anticipated interest, and the amount and quality of planned participant engagement. Specific feedback will be communicated to the authors. All discussion stream submissions are evaluated as per the overall discussion stream rubric based on overall requirements for this stream. Please see the full Panel Evaluation Rubric for expectations specific to panel sessions and the panel template at the top of this page.
• Collaboratoriums: The questionnaire will ask moderators/organizers to describe the collaboratorium format and schedule, a description of the topics/questions to be addressed, how long each topic discussion will take, the topic’s relevance to the conference themes, and how participants will engage in the collaboratorium. Collaboratorium submissions will be evaluated based on overall quality, fit to the conference, anticipated interest, and the amount and quality of planned participant engagement. Specific feedback will be communicated to the authors. Please see the full Collaboratorium evaluation rubric for expectations specific to these sessions and the collaboratorium template at the top of this page.
• Workshops: The questionnaire will ask workshop facilitators to provide information about the facilitators; a description to be part of the official conference materials; specific plans and activities for participant engagement; and other relevant details. Workshop proposals will be evaluated based on overall quality, fit to the conference, anticipated interest, and the amount and quality of planned participant engagement. Please see the full Workshop Evaluation Rubric for expectations specific to these sessions and the workshop template at the top of this page.