How to write an abstract that gets accepted at an ELT conference

Every year, hundreds of Colombian English teachers have something worth sharing and never send it. The reason is rarely the idea. It is the abstract: two hundred and fifty words that feel harder to write than the whole project they describe.

This guide walks you through what a conference abstract is for, how to structure one, and what makes reviewers say yes.

What an abstract is actually for

An abstract is not a summary of everything you did. It is a promise. It tells the review committee, and later the participants scrolling the programme, what will happen in that room and why they should be in it.

Reviewers read dozens of proposals in one sitting. Yours competes for attention with people working on similar topics. The abstracts that get accepted are the ones where the reviewer finishes reading and can say, in one sentence, what the session is about.

If a colleague cannot repeat your session back to you after reading your abstract, it is not ready.

The structure that works

Most accepted abstracts, whatever the session type, follow the same five moves. You do not need headings — just make sure each move is there.

1. Context (1–2 sentences)

Where does this happen? A public school in Caquetá, a language centre in Bogotá, a rural school with intermittent electricity, a B.A. programme in Santander. Be concrete. "In the Colombian EFL context" tells the reviewer nothing; "in a rural public school in Boyacá with two English teachers for 480 students" tells them everything.

2. The problem or question (1–2 sentences)

What was not working, what you wondered about, what gap you noticed. This is the part teachers tend to skip because it feels obvious to them. It is not obvious to the reader.

3. What you did (2–3 sentences)

The intervention, the strategy, the study. Include enough method that the reader trusts you: how long, with whom, what data. "During a 10-week intervention with 32 ninth graders, we collected students' written reflections, classroom recordings and a pre/post writing sample."

4. What you found (2–3 sentences)

Results, patterns, tensions. This is the section most often left vague, usually because the author is worried the findings are not impressive enough. Reviewers are not looking for spectacular results. They are looking for honest ones. "Three of the five groups abandoned the strategy by week six" is a finding, and a useful one.

5. What the audience takes home (1–2 sentences)

What will attendees be able to do, question or try on Monday? This is what turns a report into a session.

Match the abstract to the session type

At the ASOCOPI Annual Conference, each abstract is labelled by session type in the programme, so participants know what they are signing up for. Writing the wrong kind of abstract for the type you chose is one of the most common reasons for rejection.

• Lecture — state of the art, theoretical reflection or critical appraisal. Your abstract should show the scope of what you will map and the position you will take.
• Research report — partial or final results of a study. Method and findings must be visible.
• Workshop — most of the session is practical. The abstract must say what participants will do, not only what they will hear.
• Pedagogical experience — an application of a theory or approach in your own context. Foreground the context and what you learned from it.
• Colloquium — several presenters addressing one theme with interaction between them. The abstract needs a shared thread, not a list of separate talks.

If you are submitting a workshop, count the verbs in your abstract. If none of them apply to the audience, rewrite it.

Six mistakes that cost acceptances

Writing the abstract last, in a hurry. Draft it early, when you still remember why the project mattered. Revise it after.

Promising more than one session can hold. Reviewers can tell when three studies have been crammed into forty minutes. One clear idea beats three rushed ones.

Hiding the findings. "Results will be discussed" is a red flag. If data collection is still in progress, say so and describe your preliminary patterns.

Jargon without payload. Words like transformative, innovative and significant do no work. Replace each one with the specific thing it is standing in for.

Ignoring the conference theme. If the call names threads — as ASOCOPI's 2026 conference does with saberes glocales, diversities and AI — the committee reads with those in mind. Connect your work to one of them honestly. Do not bolt on a theme you did not actually address.

Going over the word limit. It reads as not having read the instructions, which is the worst first impression a proposal can make.

Two versions of the same opening

Weak:

This presentation will discuss the importance of implementing innovative methodologies in the EFL classroom in order to improve students' communicative competence in the Colombian context.

That sentence could describe ten thousand sessions. Now:

In a public school in Florencia, Caquetá, ninth graders who spoke confidently in the corridor went silent the moment class began. This workshop shares a six-week routine we built to move that corridor talk into the classroom, and what happened when it partly failed.

The second version is not more sophisticated. It is more specific, and it makes a reader curious.

Before you send it

Read it aloud. Give it to a colleague who does not know the project and ask them to tell you what the session is about. Check the word count. Check the session type. Then send it.

And send it even if you are not sure. A proposal that is not submitted is rejected by default — and school teachers, novice researchers and teachers in training have a place at ASOCOPI's conference by design, not by exception.

If you are getting ready to submit, our webinar library has a recorded session on writing a good abstract for academic events, with María Eugenia Guapacha and Orlando Chaves.

Keep going

• Check the call for proposals and session types for the current conference.
• Browse the recorded webinars on academic writing and research.
• If your work is closer to an article than a talk, see HOW Journal's submission guidelines.