The information below compiles demographics for presenters of accepted events, as well as information on the extent to which various communities are participating in the 2017 AWP Conference & Bookfair. A list of all the accepted events reflected in this report will be announced Monday, August 8.

While the gender data for presenters is consistent with data we have made public over the past several years, the data on the race representation of the presenters is new. This is the first year that the majority of our presenters (78%) responded to requests for racial demographics, providing a representative sample of all events. This was not the case in previous years.

Thank you to everyone who took the time to provide this information. Over the next couple of months, we expect the gender and race data to change slightly, because some panelists must step off events if they are overcommitted to other accepted events. Event organizers will select replacements. AWP limits the number of events in which any one presenter may participate in order to increase participation and inclusivity of the conference.

When applicable, comparable data is taken from the 2015 US Census.

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect a 91.6% response rate among 2017 presenters.

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Unfortunately, the US Census only defines gender in terms of female and male, and there is no comparable data for AWP’s presenters who are Agender, Androgynous, Bigender, Cisgender, Intersex, Genderfluid, Transgender, Transsexual, and “a gender not identified here.”

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect a 78.1% response rate among 2017 presenters.

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*AWP statistics reflect a 78.1% response rate among 2017 presenters.

**The US Census does not have any comparable data that corresponds to “a race not identified here.”

250 accepted events identified themselves as addressed to a particular affinity group. A full list of these events will be published along with a list of all of the accepted events on Monday, August 8. AWP accepted a total of 522 events out of 1,465 proposals. Only 35% of the proposed events were accepted overall. The events referenced below self-identified themselves, in their titles or descriptions, as events dedicated to the representation of specific literary communities, as follows:

• 23 African-American events (42% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 21 Asian-American events (49% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 20 disabilities event (42% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 51 feminist and women’s issues events (34% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 12 graduate students and adjunct faculty events (71% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 10 Indigenous events (42% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 33 international and translation events (66% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 4 K-12 events (21% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 18 Latino events (51% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 27 LGBTQ events (47% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 5 religion events (21% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 116 social justice and multicultural events (48% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 6 veterans events (55% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)

Many of these 250 events host discussions about more than one of these communities, and so they are counted as part of each community with which they engage. Many members of these communities also participate in other events that are not listed here, as this account quantifies topics, not individuals. This tally of self-identifying events lists only those events that, in their titles or descriptions, declare affiliations with these communities. For instance, graduate students and adjunct faculty participate in many other events that are not labeled by the terms “students” or “adjuncts.” Many readings inclusive of people of color or the LGBTQ community are simply billed as readings and are therefore not counted here, though they are represented in the other demographic data. The diversity of the conference extends far beyond this tally of 250 self-identifying events addressed to the concerns of one or more affinity groups.

Visit the page on How Event Are Selected for details about how the 2017 Washington, DC Subcommittee made their selections. AWP is grateful to the subcommittee for their hard work in providing a balanced and inclusive schedule for the 2017 conference.   

The 2017 conference builds upon the success of previous conferences. A survey of attendees of our 2016 conference in Los Angeles provided many useful indicators. The results of the survey of Los Angeles attendees demonstrated a high overall satisfaction with the conference. 95% of the respondents rated the conference at least “Satisfactory,” and 77% rated it “Very Good” or “Excellent.” Likewise, 93% of the bookfair respondents rated the bookfair at least “Satisfactory,” and 73% rated it “Very Good” or “Excellent.”   

Many attendees applauded the inclusiveness of the roster of presenters, the variety of presses at the bookfair, and the diversity of subjects. Many attendees called for a broader range of discussions, apart from politics, pertaining to the craft of writing. Many opinions about what the conference should be were in opposition to one another, and the opinions reflected the pluralistic, generational, and changing concerns of contemporary authors, teachers, publishers, and readers. AWP strives to balance these concerns and the concerns of our membership. The conference provides the most inclusive literary event in North America, and AWP remains committed to programming that reflects the interests of the many communities of literature. Thank you for your support. The writer’s place is in the public arena, and together we have built a bigger town square.