Write up about the Conference
The Conference featured three plenary speeches and 39 parallel sessions. A film competition was held on the 2nd day. There were more than 160 delegate coming from 25 countries including the Philippines. Seven were Filipinos: two from UP Diliman (including myself), one from UPLB and three from the Southern Luzon State University in Lucena, Quezon. It was refreshing to see faculty members of an unknown SUC present their research in an international conference. We agreed to continuously link for updating. I invited them to join the Philippines Communication Society (PCS), where conferences are held regularly and a Journal is published as a venue or outlet for research.
The Conference organizers need to improve on their monitoring of the sessions. They left the Management of the sessions chars. There were sessions that did not have audience.
The registration fee was too much (50,000 yen or about PhP25,000.00). Yet there was no lunch, only coffee and limited miniature cookies, no cultural presentation and a dinner which was ticketed was not worth 5,000 yen. I can’t help but think that the conference was a money-making effort.
Feedback on paper presented
What was picked up from my presentation was the ICT literacy level of Filipinos, which was high compared to countries of attendees (Spain, Portugal and India). The reactors were surprised that the education of our people is ensured by the presence of more than a hundred state universities spread across the nation.
Future directions of research presented
The paper will be submitted to peer-reviewed Journal. One option is the IAFOR Journal.
Potential foreign collaborators
I have the contact information of scholars from the Universities of Hawaii, Spain, Portugal and other universities abroad.
Other important contacts and insights
The UP, particularly the College of Mass Communication, could organized or host a better conference on media and communication. Participants in these IAFOR conference would be interested in attending this.
Short write-up of one’s participation (to be used to feature/publicize the grantee’s participation in the conference)
More than presenting the paper, what was more exciting were my roles as abstract reviewer and session chair. The review allowed me to look into the kind of researches done by other scholars abroad. Of the three papers I reviewed only one passed the standard. Moderating the session was a breeze with very cooperative and friendly presentors and attentive kind audience. The discussion was animated as they engage the presentors with a meaningful discussion.
