This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: INT 495, Giving an Academic Presentation (adapted from www.muhlenberg.edu/depts/psychology/Presentations.htm) Below are guidelines about how to do an academic presentation. Please do not feel that these presentations must be so formal that you cannot enjoy yourselves. I realize that there is some pressure just doing an academic presentation, but think about what makes you excited about the research you are doing and convey that excitement in your presentation. Also, as a courtesy to other students, I ask that you attend all of the presentations, even when you have finished yours. And to show support for your classmates, please be attentive and ask questions during the discussion part of the presentation. Length & Format: All presentations should be between 12‐15‐minutes (any presentations over 15 minutes will be abruptly cut off), followed by a 5‐minute Q&A/ discussion. You must have some sort of visual accompaniment (powerpoint slides, overheads, media clips, etc). While 15 minutes might sound like a long time…trust me, it will go very fast…so plan to be succinct and to the point. If you do a powerpoint keep in mind you will only have time for approximately 10 slides. Content: Your presentation should not contain the details of your written work, or an extensive literature or background section. This is a summary of your paper. You need to figure out what is your main and most important point and just present that. Be precise and present only the basic information that is needed to understand your research, why you did it and what you found. Guidelines for each section: • Introduction: Give a very brief and succinct background of key studies leading to your main argument. You want to tell the audience “here is what we know” and “here is the gap my project fills”. o Make your opening sentence an interesting question or dilemma to capture interest in your first sentence. You are telling an interesting story. o Your visuals should have simple bullet points that refer to the topic. Do not use the author or citations as your bullet points. Keep the main outline points directed at the content rather than the sources. • Background: Just cover the basics of history, definition of terms, demographics, etc., of what you need for your audience to follow your argument. In general, this is also the time to talk about any holes in your data of applicable, but don’t spend too much time with what you ‘did not do’. • Summary of Analysis and Results: An audience can only keep track of one or two results. If you have more than two results, you can discuss each point with the audience as you present it. You also want to include statistical information on your slide that the audience can relate to, but it must be interpreted by pointing out what is relevant. Examples follow: o
o Don’t do this: “Our F value was 3.45 and our p values were .03. The mean for Protestants was 5.56, the mean for Catholics was 4.58…” Do this: “We found the mean effect for religion. As you can see from our Table, Protestants scored higher than Catholics…this is interesting because it suggests…” Do NOT downplay the quality of your research or undercut your work when you discuss possible problems. Focus on your evidence and argument and the next steps needed if there is a gap between your reasoning and your results. DO tie your conclusions back to the opening of your introduction o Grading Your Presentation: 20 points ‐ Visuals ‐ Were there sufficient and appropriate visual materials to understand the content? Were the visuals to the point, easy to see, and did they clarify the research? Was there too much information on the slide to make it illegible? Was it easy to follow the speaker and the slides simultaneously? 30 points ‐ Delivery – Did the presenter appear to be just reading from the screen, or did he/she know the material well enough to present it? Was the presenter’s voice clear & sufficiently loud? Was the presenter’s voice sufficiently modulated and animated to add interest and emphasize key points? Was the speed of delivery too fast to not be able to follow the argument? Did the speaker stay within the time limit? 50 points ‐ Information ‐ Were the claims/thesis and scope of the project clear? Was the evidence to support the thesis clear and succinct? Were the sections of the presentation succinct and summarize well enough to follow ? Did the speaker encourage a discussion? Were the main points directed at the content rather than the sources? ...
View Full Document
- Spring '11