Call for Proposals
Submit form online
or fax completed form to (817) 496-5800
Select from the topics below for more information.
Who is invited to submit a proposal?
Do you use successful health and wellness strategies, methods, or best practices that you want to share? Speakers who can describe or demonstrate innovative uses of health and wellness in their sessions are encouraged to submit proposals. Presentations that focus on practical use in a health and wellness program for workplace settings are especially considered, as well as interactive sessions. See the Proposal Rubric for details.
We accept one hour presentations from companies who have reserved and paid for a 2008 booth space by July 27, 2008. We also will accept one 1 hour presentation from companies who are not exhibiting but commit to an Educator Wellness Conference sponsorship of $5,000 or more. Exhibitors can submit your presentation(s) using the Exhibitor Form and fax to (817) 496-5800.
We accept one hour presentations from companies who have reserved and paid for a 2008 booth space by July 27, 2008. We also will accept one 1 hour presentation from companies who are not exhibiting but commit to an Educator Wellness Conference sponsorship of $5,000 or more. Exhibitors can submit your presentation(s) using the Exhibitor Form and fax to (817) 496-5800.
What we are looking for.
Professionals in the areas of health and wellness, Researchers and Leaders in the fields of health, wellness, as well as Professional Educational Leaders willing to lead in this new paradigm of change to health and wellness . . . .
Be prepared before submitting your proposal. Below is a list of questions that may require preparation or research.
Be prepared before submitting your proposal. Below is a list of questions that may require preparation or research.
Benefits for Speakers
- Great location ensures attendance draw
- Exposure to an elite group of educators
- Savings on conference registration
- Satisfaction of sharing personal success with educational colleagues
- On-site technical support provided by a professional company
- In-session monitors for speaker assistance
- Copies of session evaluations provided to speaker after conference
- Free continental breakfast provided each morning
Speaker Registration
All session speakers and co-speakers are required to register for the conference and pay the registration fees. Educator Well Health, Inc. pleased to offer free registration for each accepted speaker / co-speaker.
Download the Presenter Request Form
Download the Presenter Request Form
Exhibitor Proposal
Vendors who reserve a booth by will be offered a one-hour session. Booth commitment, payment and session proposal must be paid by July 27, 2008. Use the Exhibitor Proposal Form.
Sessions
- How to Feel Good
- Teacher Renewal: Creating Peace Cultures in Elementary / Secondary Urban Schools
- Nutrition and Wellness
- No Teacher Left Behind
- Emotional / Social / Mental Wellness in K-12 Settings
- How to End Each Day With More Energy Than You Started
- The Missing Piece: the Prevention of Depression in The Workplace
- Why Are You Here? Discovering Your Personal Mission Statement
- Proper Ergonomics and Stress Reduction for Today’s Educator
- The Eight Healthiest Things Educators Can Do For Their Students and Schools The History of the Wellness Movement
- K-12 Wellness – What Is It?
- Wellness Programming Ideas and Activities for K-12 Settings
- Building Healthy Work Cultures
- Connection: The Currency of Wellness
- Creating Ideal Work Environment for Health and Wellness Promotion
- The Future of Health Promotion – A World in Need of Change: Inspiring Outcomes and Renewing Hope
- Creating a Conscious Culture of Healthy Relationships
- Management Coaching: Healthy Workplace…One Conversation At A Time
- The Impact of Incentives on Health Assessment Participation
- How To Be The Best Boss
- Weight Management – Society’s Massive Problem: Motivational Interventions – Our Effective Solution
- Breaking The Sugar-Stress Cycle
- The Economics of Your Emotional Balance: Creating a Surplus of Positive Emotions for Overall Wellness
- Fitness After 50: Smart Activity Programs for the Second Half of Life
Writing Guide
- Review the topic sessions and choose the one that your proposal addresses.
- Use the Proposal Rubric to guide your proposal development process.
- Title of the presentation is limited to ten words.
- List at least three learning objectives for your audience.
- Presentation summary should be 50 words or fewer.
- Avoid abbreviations and acronyms.
- Submit a 200 to 400 word description of your presentation including content, interactive activities, and times required for each.
- If there is more than one speaker, a primary speaker must be designated. (limit - 3 co-speakers)
- Contact information must be submitted for each co-presenter.
- Complete your proposal online and submit.
Selection Criteria
Selections are based on relevance of the topic to the conference and usefulness to the conference attendees, as well as the quality and clarity of the proposal. An overall program balance will be maintained in the range of topics and grade levels of the participants. Proposals need to be clear about specific materials, programs and how results were determined. Prospective speakers are encouraged to tell how technology has changed their teaching and/or their students' learning.
Proposal Review Process
We welcome proposals addressing all levels of experience, from technology novice to advanced user.
Selections are based on:
Selections are based on:
- Relevance of the topic to the conference
- Usefulness to the conference attendees
- Quality and clarity of the proposal
- Balance of topic sessions and attendees
- Clarity of specific materials, programs and how results were determined
- Degree to which technology influences teaching and learning
Proposal Rubric
1. Does the proposal deliver new and relevant information or research?
5. The proposal delivers very new and very relevant information or research and 3-5 citations or best practices with appropriate connections.
4. The proposal delivers somewhat new and somewhat relevant information or research and 1-2 citations or best practices with appropriate connections.
3. The proposal delivers average information or research and 0-1 citations or best practices with appropriate connections
2. The proposal delivers somewhat dated information or research and 0-1 citations or best practices with no appropriate connections.
1. The proposal delivers dated information or research and no citations or best practices and no appropriate connections.
2. Does the proposal address the conference sessions and topics?
5. The proposal substantially addresses a conference session and topic.
4. The proposal clearly addresses a conference session and topic.
3. The proposal mostly addresses a conference session and topic.
2. The proposal marginally addresses a conference session and topic.
1. The proposal does not address a conference session and topic.
3. Does the proposal address strategies applicable to ALL; are the strategies replicable, and ready to implement Monday morning after the conference?
5. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to all learners of all ages; are replicable; and very easy to implement.
4. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to many types of learners of limited ages; are replicable and somewhat easy to implement.
3. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to some types of learners of limited ages; are replicable; and questionably easy to implement.
2. The proposal addresses strategies applicable of a few types of learners of very limited ages; are not easily replicable; and difficult to implement.
1. The proposal does not address the needs of any learners; are not replicable; and are very difficult to implement.
4. Is the proposal interactive, relevant, and thought-provoking?
5. The proposal is highly interactive, highly relevant, and highly thought-provoking to the intended participants.
4. The proposal is very interactive, very relevant, and very thought-provoking to the intended participants.
3. The proposal is somewhat interactive, somewhat relevant, and somewhat thought-provoking to the intended participants.
2. The proposal is not very interactive, a very relevant, and not very thought-provoking to the intended participants.
1. The proposal is not at all interactive, not relevant, and not thought provoking to the intended participants.
5. Is the proposal well-written, and does it have clear learner objectives?
5. The proposal is extremely well-written and the learner objectives are very clear.
4. The proposal is well-written and the learner objectives are somewhat clear.
3. The proposal is averagely-written and the learner objectives are mediocrely-stated.
2. The proposal is marginally-written and the learner objectives are vague.
1. The proposal is poorly-written and the learner objectives are not submitted.
5. The proposal delivers very new and very relevant information or research and 3-5 citations or best practices with appropriate connections.
4. The proposal delivers somewhat new and somewhat relevant information or research and 1-2 citations or best practices with appropriate connections.
3. The proposal delivers average information or research and 0-1 citations or best practices with appropriate connections
2. The proposal delivers somewhat dated information or research and 0-1 citations or best practices with no appropriate connections.
1. The proposal delivers dated information or research and no citations or best practices and no appropriate connections.
2. Does the proposal address the conference sessions and topics?
5. The proposal substantially addresses a conference session and topic.
4. The proposal clearly addresses a conference session and topic.
3. The proposal mostly addresses a conference session and topic.
2. The proposal marginally addresses a conference session and topic.
1. The proposal does not address a conference session and topic.
3. Does the proposal address strategies applicable to ALL; are the strategies replicable, and ready to implement Monday morning after the conference?
5. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to all learners of all ages; are replicable; and very easy to implement.
4. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to many types of learners of limited ages; are replicable and somewhat easy to implement.
3. The proposal addresses strategies applicable to some types of learners of limited ages; are replicable; and questionably easy to implement.
2. The proposal addresses strategies applicable of a few types of learners of very limited ages; are not easily replicable; and difficult to implement.
1. The proposal does not address the needs of any learners; are not replicable; and are very difficult to implement.
4. Is the proposal interactive, relevant, and thought-provoking?
5. The proposal is highly interactive, highly relevant, and highly thought-provoking to the intended participants.
4. The proposal is very interactive, very relevant, and very thought-provoking to the intended participants.
3. The proposal is somewhat interactive, somewhat relevant, and somewhat thought-provoking to the intended participants.
2. The proposal is not very interactive, a very relevant, and not very thought-provoking to the intended participants.
1. The proposal is not at all interactive, not relevant, and not thought provoking to the intended participants.
5. Is the proposal well-written, and does it have clear learner objectives?
5. The proposal is extremely well-written and the learner objectives are very clear.
4. The proposal is well-written and the learner objectives are somewhat clear.
3. The proposal is averagely-written and the learner objectives are mediocrely-stated.
2. The proposal is marginally-written and the learner objectives are vague.
1. The proposal is poorly-written and the learner objectives are not submitted.