Since in the conference proceedings only the papers that pass a review process (double-blind) are published, take care to their content, language and formal level.

Reviewers primarily assess:

  • theme of an article, its topicality and relation to the focus of the conference

  • scientific level of the article, i.e. especially its structure, logical coherence, a search on the topic methodology, discussed literature and the method of argumentation

  • formal requirements, i.e. cogency of the title and abstract, intelligibility of the text, graphs or tables, scientitic style, terminology and literature

  • contribution to the field and practice (article brings new knowledge, ideas, thoughts, processes?)


Recommended structure of the text is the following (nevertheless, it is necessary to adapt it to the selected topic):

  • introduction, which outlines the theme of an article (a main theoretical or research issue, hypothesis, problem) its objectives and the structure of the subsequent text,

  • searches for the theme (putting into a broader, preferably into international context; what the others write about the topic),

  • methodology (how will be a given question or problem addressed),

  • results (application of a method, elaboration of a given topic),

  • discussion (especially over a topic, search, methodology and results),

  • conclusion (whether and how the problem was solved, what this means for further work on the topic).


When writing an article it is useful to bear in mind a certain model reader and imagine the level of his/her knowledge (a reviewer, visitor of a conference, researcher, student). Things which are commonly known can be briefly introduced with the references to the literature, while lesser-known things, or pronouncedly specific and detailed ones should be properly explained, even verbatim quoted or otherwise appropriately contextualized.

Bear also in mind that the creation of an article is a process: you write an article because you want to present and discuss its content at the conference. From there additional suggestions or questions may arise and you may incorporate them into your article after the conference. This will then be submitted to a detailed assessment to reviewers and based on their expertise, the editorial board will decide whether your article is worth publishing in conference proceedings and meets the criteria for inclusion in the database SCOPUS. It is possible that your contribution will be adopted as it is.

But it is very likely that the reviewers will have additional questions or requirements, and the text will therefore have to be slightly modified or fundamentally restructured and the reviewers will have to assess it again. However, if the reviewers do not understand your text, or the effort to remake it will be too demanding (the conference proceedings will be published approximately three months after the conference) they might refuse it.

Essays accepted at the conference were selected on the basis of received annotations. During this selection the main emphasis was put on the topic of a paper, that is, whether it fits the conference concept (see: The focus of the conference on the website CSUP). In a similar way the complete papers will be assessed retrospectively. The excessive deviation from the topic declared in the title and in the abstract, is likely to become the reason for its non-inclusion in the Proceedings.

The papers undergo only cursory proofreading, so please read the text before submitting it once more and check. The language level is actually one of the criteria for reviewing the paper.