The information below compiles demographics for presenters of accepted events, as well as information on the extent to which various communities participate in the 2018 AWP Conference & Bookfair. A list of all accepted events reflected in this report will be announced on July 31, 2017.

Data on the gender and race representation, and the response rate, of presenters is consistent with data we have made public over the past several years.

Demographic questions regarding age and disability will be added to our website by August 1. We will release data on these demographics once we produce representative samples, and we encourage all conference participants to log on to the My Conference Participant Information section of our website to complete these questions.

As with all demographic data, AWP uses responses to queries in the aggregate only (in general sums and percentages) in reports to our funders and members. AWP never discloses anyone’s individual characteristics nor shares individual characteristics with the subcommittee members who evaluate proposals.

Visit the page on How Events Are Selected for details about how the 2018 Tampa Subcommittee made their selections. AWP is grateful to the subcommittee for their hard work in providing a balanced and inclusive schedule for the 2018 conference.

Thank you to all the participants who took the time to provide this information. Over the next couple of months, we expect the 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 the participation and inclusivity of the conference.

When applicable, comparable data is taken from the 2016 US Census.

• 2018 Presenters Identified by Gender
• 2018 Presenters by Gender Compared to US Census
• 2018 Proposed Presenters by Gender Compared to Accepted Presenters
• 2018 Presenters Identified by Race
• 2018 Presenters by Race Compared to US Census
• 2018 Proposed Presenters by Race Compared to Accepted Presenters
• 2018 Accepted Events Addressed to Particular Affinity Groups

2018 Presenters Who Identified Themselves by Gender*

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect a 90.4% response rate among 2018 presenters.

**Presenters identifying as multiple genders include presenters who identify as transgender (9), as male (7), as gender fluid (7), as genderqueer (14), as transsexual (1), as Two-Spirit (4), as female (3), as cisgender (1), as agender (4), as androgynous (5), and as a “a gender not identified here” (7).

2018 Presenters by Gender Compared to US Census*

(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, gender fluid, transgender, transsexual, and “a gender not identified here.”

2018 Proposed Presenters by Gender Compared to Accepted Presenters*

Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect a 90.4% response rate among 2018 presenters.

**This data represents a 42.8% acceptance rate for agender proposed presenters, a 50% acceptance rate for androgynous, a 100% acceptance rate for bigender, a 66.6% acceptance rate for cisgender, a 0% acceptance rate for intersex, a 49.9% acceptance rate for female, a 58.3% acceptance rate for gender fluid, a 50.5% acceptance rate for male, a 41.6% acceptance rate for transgender, a 100% acceptance rate for transsexual, and 35.3% acceptance rate for “a gender not identified here.”

2018 Presenters Who Identify Themselves by Race*

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect an 84.2% response rate among 2018 presenters.

** Presenters identifying as mixed race include American Indian or Alaskan Native (37), as Asian (55), as Black or African American (43), as Latino (51), as Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (15), as White (103), and as a race not identified here (39).

2018 Presenters by Race Compared to US Census*

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*AWP statistics reflect an 84.2% response rate among 2018 presenters.

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

2018 Proposed Presenters by Race Compared to Accepted Presenters*

(Click the above graph for a larger version)

*Statistics reflect a 90.4% response rate among 2018 presenters.

**This data represents a 73% acceptance rate for American Indian or Alaskan Native proposed presenters, a 57.4% acceptance rate for Asian, a 59.8% acceptance rate for Black or African American, a 60.3% acceptance rate for Latino, 56.5% acceptance rate for Mixed Race, a 57.1% acceptance rate for Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, a 43.4% acceptance rate for White, and a 51.2% acceptance rate for “a race not identified here.”

2018 Accepted Events Address to Particular Affinity Groups

271 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 July 31, 2017. AWP accepted a total of 522 events out of 1,239 proposals. Only 42% of the proposed events were accepted overall. This year, for every community, acceptance rates are equal to or greater than the overall acceptance rates and in most cases, the acceptance rates have increased from #AWP17.

The events referenced below are self-identified, in their titles or descriptions, as events dedicated to the representation of specific literary communities, as follows:

• 21 African American events (54% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 22 Asian American events (81% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 20 disability-related events (53% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 60 feminist and women’s issues events (42% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 15 graduate students and adjunct faculty events (47% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 10 Indigenous events (67% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 37 international and translation events (88% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 14 K-12 events (48% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 16 Latino events (57% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 26 LGBTQ events (42% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 16 religion events (46% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 117 social justice and multicultural events (66% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)
• 10 veterans’ events (46% acceptance rate among self-identifying proposals)

Many of these 271 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 events that are not listed here, as this data 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 other demographic data. The diversity of the conference extends far beyond this tally of 271 self-identifying events addressed to the concerns of one or more affinity groups.

The 2018 conference builds upon the success of previous conferences. The results of the survey of Washington, DC attendees demonstrated a high overall satisfaction with the conference. 93% of the respondents rated the conference at least “Satisfactory,” and 74% rated it “Very Good” or “Excellent.” Likewise, 97% of the bookfair respondents rated the bookfair at least “Satisfactory,” and 83% rated it “Very Good” or “Excellent.”

Many 2017 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.