Archive for the ‘Presentation’ Category

Presentations and lectures

Tuesday, July 7th, 2009

Gian-Carlo Rota was a well known mathematician of the twentieth century. He was also known for his innovative teaching style. Rota wrote an essay on the things he wished he had been taught. Although, the essay covers a lot of bases, I will briefly comment on Rota’s main advice on giving talks/lectures/presentations:

  1. Every lecture should make only one main point: One mistake which we all are prone to making is putting too many things in a single presentation.  A presentation is more effective if there is a single theme and the theme is explained gently and highlighted by examples. Rota, gives the analogy of the audience as a cow herd which needs to gently steered to the central point.
  2. Never run overtime: Rota really stresses this point. It is true that even if a presentation is great, it can be irritating for the audience if the speaker does not keep track of time. Interestingly, in a conference I attended, the program chair stressed the same point but ended up running over time in her own presentation. One could hear chuckles in the room.
  3. Relate to your audience: Rota also writes that making a connection with audience is helpful. It is certainly helpful in breaking the ice, easing the nerves and also making the presentation more personalized and conversational. The talk should be tailored according to the audience. Yeats once said, “Think like a wise man, but communicate in the language of the people”.
  4. Give them something to take home: This is one consistent habit, I have witnessed in all good speakers. Some speakers even emphasise to the listeners they might want to listen to a certain particular point as the take home message. The take home message also pleases the listener as one can remember something useful from an involved talk.

PowerPoint slides

Monday, April 27th, 2009

The stereotypical PowerPoint presentations with monotonous design, lots of bullet points and topic-subtopic structure have received much criticism. This has been covered in the New York Times. Similar concerns have been voiced in Wired Magazine and the Chicago Tribune. Whereas some authors may complain more about the monopoly and ubiquity of certain presentation software, one strong criticism has been on the presenter being forced to think and present in a rigid way which is difficult to absorb by the audience. Edward Tufte is specially scathing in his attack:

With so little information per slide, many, many slides are needed. Audiences consequently endure a relentless sequentiality, one damn slide after another. When information is stacked in time, it is difficult to understand context and evaluate relationships. Visual reasoning usually works more effectively when relevant information is shown side by side. Often, the more intense the detail, the greater the clarity and understanding. This is especially so for statistical data, where the fundamental analytical act is to make comparisons.

It is easy to criticize but what is the solution? In terms of alternate presentation methodology, there is a lot of literature. One recurrent theme is the ‘assertion-evidence design’. The assertion-evidence design is aimed to rectify two problems in traditional designs namely unclear assertion and unclear linking of evidence:

For one thing, identifying the main sentence assertion of each slide requires more thinking than simply identifying the slide’s topic word or phrase. In addition, coming up with cogent visual evidence to support each assertion is more demanding than coming up with a bullet list of subtopics for each slide topic. Another hurdle to adopting the design arises from overcoming the weak defaults of PowerPoint for type size, type placement, text anchors, bulleted text, and distracting backgrounds.

The conclusion is that irrespective of one having strong feelings for or against specific softwares, a ‘bullet-point ridden’ presentation is not ideal. Complex ideas require innovative presentation and logical flow. Finally, the main message of the presentation should always be emphasized by well chosen headings and backed by useful pictures.

Videolectures.net

Friday, January 9th, 2009

The internet has expedited the information age in every way. Academic collaboration has been facilitated by online communication. I wanted to highlight a new website which has many scientific lectures online. Compared to generic video sites such as www.video.google.com/ and www.youtube.com, sites that contain random videos, videolectures.net specializes in scientific and academic lectures. (more…)

Technical Presentations

Tuesday, October 21st, 2008

A good technical presentation requires a lot more than presentation skills. A broad understanding of the subject and where one’s work stands in relation to other work is important. Michael D. Ernst has some excellent advice on keys to a good technical presentation. Ernst emphasizes that the goal is to convince that the problem is worthwhile, that it’s not an easy problem, and a good solution has been proposed. In order to convince the audience that the research is worthwhile, it is important to give motivational examples.

He also points out a mistake which I am prone to making:

Do not try to do too much in a talk. About one slide per minute is a good pace (possibly more if lots of your slides are animations that take only moments to present). If you try to fit the entire technical content of a paper into a talk, you will rush, with the result that the audience may come away understanding nothing.

This is especially true if one has some lengthy proof to explain and one gets into the details of the proof. It is better to spell out the result and give some insight into how the proof works rather than explaining each step of the proof. Ernst summarizes this approach well by saying that:

It’s better to think of the talk as an advertisement for the paper that gives the key ideas, intuitions, and results, and that makes the audience eager to read your paper or to talk with you to learn more. That does not mean holding back important details – merely omitting less important ones.