Hi.
I’m the RE Mentor for RE@21 papers and I’m here to do what I can to help you.
If you are considering writing a paper that examines the RE field or the RE conference over the past 20 years, then I am available to help you. As indicated at the Web page for the RE@21 Paper Category, a paper in this category takes one of four possible forms: The paper may
as reported mainly by the 20 years of the RE conference.
To this list, I would add some additional forms: The paper may
again as reported mainly by the 20 years of the RE conference.
As indicated by the Website, the paper may focus in depth on
again as reported mainly by the 20 years of the RE conference. Alternatively, the paper may take a more birds-eye view of the entire RE field, again as reported mainly by the 20 years of the RE conference.
If you have little experience writing papers in general or you have experience writing papers, but not this kind (Then again, since this is the first time the RE conference has this category of papers, no one has experience writing such papers, even I.), then I am here to help you.
A paper in this category would probably introduce its main idea and offer its main thesis and then proceed to provide supporting evidence from mainly papers that have appeared in the RE and in related workshops such as REFSQ, WER, and RE's own workshops. In fact, the necessity to cite past papers is why the page limit does not include the references, which may end up being several pages.
If you really have never written a paper before, you might wish to look at the advice of the other mentors, in particular, Ian Alexander’s .
Pay particular attention to paragraph 4. I like Ian’s Paragraph 5 about asking others to read your paper and watching them as they do so!
Don’t be afraid to be controversial. Since this kind of paper does not have evaluation criteria that are as objective as those in the other categories, probably the most interesting papers in this category are the ones that will be accepted. A controversial paper tends to be interesting and would likely be accepted if the reasoning in the paper is sound.
In any case, I am here to offer my advice and opinion at any stage of the writing process, e.g., an early outline, a first draft, a polished draft. I will read it as someone who has gone to every RE conference since the first in 1993 and as someone who has been on every RE conference PC since the 1994 conference.
Please do be aware that I will be as honest, critical, and constructive as I can in assessing the acceptability of your paper. However, I cannot guarantee that if I like your paper and consider it acceptable, it will be accepted. For one thing, about 1/2 of the papers that I have submitted to RE have not be accepted (sigh). For another thing, I will have to declare a conflict of interest that will prevent me from being one of the reviewers of your paper after you submit it.
I look forward to receiving your paper drafts .
fim
