How should I present a talk on an article?

[Genecks]

How should I present a talk on an article?

How do many scientists, biologists, experimenters present their research?

 

I have to give a talk about echolocation in mustache bats. These mice that flap around.

 

Anyway, it's a serious article, and I'm not too sure how to go about a talk. I mean, I've given talks on research I've done before. And I'd have to say I have my own particular style that I like. Then again, I've never received much audience feedback. I suspect if I consider what I'm doing, maybe some people wouldn't like it. But I try to make things seem a little interesting and interactive, as I like to use hand gestures and whatnot as I give a speech.

 

I like to do the following:

 

1) Introduction

2) Methods and materials

3) Results

4) Discussion

 

Yes, there is the simple fact this layout is similar to a research article. And I like presenting a speech this way, because it's like reading aloud the article to the audience... but in a more summarized, rhetorical fashion. And that's what I tend to aim for. I attempt to introduce the audience and have them understand what my goals and experiment were about.

 

I don't know if this is a bad way to present research as an orator. I like it.

 

Any ideas? Comments? Etc?

[CharonY]

A talk has a very different format and purpose than an article. Thus, you need a completely different approach to it.

There are tons of advice on how to present a scientific talk and even more on how to do a good talk. Much of which is controversial, of course.

 

The most important point is to make clear what the paper is about and why people should care. Not a lengthy introduction but rather why this one is interesting. Essentially, set the tone for the talk early and show what the listeners can expect. Again, show why this article is interesting. Bring in context early.

 

Methods are only necessary if it is unusual or highly relevant to the point. Results should not be shown isolated (as in a typical results section in papers) but clearly and immediately relate to the conclusions i.e. the interesting stuff (remember, during a talk the listeners cannot go back and forth between slides).

 

Actually reading parts of the articles or just summarizing it is a big no-no. People are guaranteed to get bored. Lack of feedback is often a result of it.

 

At the end a short summary is often useful.

 

Presenting your own work is somewhat similar. But you have to focus on why the audience should care (not why you care).

Edited January 19, 2011 by CharonY

[ajb]

Generically, I would say set yourself quite a modest goal, select and make it clear what the "take home message is". Don't get too bogged down with the details of the methods, unless your talk is specifically about a method. Details are in the paper, or people can ask you more about them after. Don't over run in time. If you have too much material you will have to cut some of it out. Never put too much information on your slides. Never simply read the slides out. It is a talk not a slide show! Tell them more. Keep an eye on the audience. Lots of blank faces or are they all nodding in agreement?

 

 

Giving talks is something you get better at with time. (I don't think I am good at giving talks!)

[CaptainPanic]

Ask yourself these questions:

 

1. What is my audience? (Are they people like batman (I mean: are they experts)? Or are they just laymen)?

2. Why should they listen to you?

3. Will they think that this is interesting? (You can choose to tell them something, or not). Typically, "methods" can be quite boring, but you must choose.

4. I think it's interesting for my audience - but will they understand it?

 

And 5. Am I not using words and abbreviations that are too difficult?

 

Remember that a presentation and a report are 2 very different things. In a report, someone can skip a chapter if they are not interested. But in a presentation, nobody can skip a part of it.

[timo]

I don't quite get the original question: are you supposed to give a talk on a paper you were given to summarize (say in some form of journal club), or are you supposed to give a talk about your research and want to base it on a publication of yours. In the latter case: why? Also, who's the audience? Is it colleagues at your institution or potential competitors, and are you going to be graded or not?

[Genecks]

I don't quite get the original question: are you supposed to give a talk on a paper you were given to summarize (say in some form of journal club), or are you supposed to give a talk about your research and want to base it on a publication of yours. In the latter case: why? Also, who's the audience? Is it colleagues at your institution or potential competitors, and are you going to be graded or not?

 

So, I was given the article "Cortical Computational Maps Control Auditory Perception" 1991 Riquimaroux, Gaioni, Suga by a professor and asked to discuss the article and present it for about 10 to 15 minutes.

 

2875092.pdf

 

I'm suppose to present the information within. My guess is that I'm basically putting the paper into dialogue format.

 

I guess it's kind of like a journal club... sure. There are about 20 of us in the room. There was suppose to be 12, but there is 20, because of some admin. screw up. I'm not giving a talk on it to further my own research agendas.

 

The audience would be 400-level (4th year) undergraduate students (peers and the two professors who lead the class). In my guess, some would be seniors and others would be 5th year undergraduate seniors. I'm not aware of any graduate students being around. I don't believe we are competing for a grade. If anything, people are competing for time slots to present papers. I was assigned to be the first person to give a speech. And yes, I will be graded.

Edited January 20, 2011 by Genecks

[imatfaal]

Practice giving the talk - I agree with almost everything said above, but I would add that a couple of practices are worth doing. A rehearsal (its got to be out loud - and yes, you will feel a bit of an idiot talking to an empty room) is essential in making sure

1. your timing is right (when I have had to assess presentations I always thought badly of the talks that only covered half the material or had to be wrapped up early because of time constraints.

2. that you will not trip up over certain sections. Unless you are reading a full script (not to be recommended) you can find that your written cue notes will be very hard to interpret whilst speaking at the same time.

3. if it's graded and the grade goes towards anything important - then I would also record one of my private attempts and listen back to it. It's a little weird listening to oneself - but you will be able to identify the areas you are fluent and more confident on and those that require a bit more thought

4. if this is allowed I would also recommend presenting it to a class mate first - his/her comments would be most useful.

[CaptainPanic]

And one of the most important things in presentations: You must know your topic inside out. And in the case of a paper, perhaps it's worth the effort to look up some of the references... or discuss it with someone else. You will get more background info, and therefore more confidence. Confidence is quite important.

[A Tripolation]

I can't say I'd be at all interested but in the most basic tenets of the methodology. Do you think they want to hear about it, or are they like me? That's one of the major problems I have with medicinal seminars and such. I'd rather hear about relevant connections to current research and how this study furthers understanding.

[ajb]

I have been invited to give a talk on some of my recent work. As such similar questions are running through my head as in the OP.

 

The audience will consist of Phd students, postdocs and more senior researchers in mathematical physics, but this will cover a wide range of expertise. As such, I have to be careful with what background material I assume. Also, only the bare minimum of proofs will be given. More like hints and overall game plan than detailed expose. It is all in the preprint if anyone in the audience is that interested.

 

Anyway, I have a couple of weeks to sort out the slides and decide what I will say, and more importantly what I will not say.

[TonyMcC]

Genecks - You have an awful lot to get over in 10 - 15 minutes.

Keep it simple and keep it relevant to the experience of your audience.

Ask them (get them to agree) that a train whistle apparently changes its pitch as it comes towards you, passes you and then travels away from you. Don't be afraid to make suitable noises EEEEEEEEOOOOOOO. Tell them this apparent change in pitch is known as Doppler shift and indicates whether the train is coming towards you or going away from you.

Ask them (get them to agree) that if you shout across a valley you sometimes get an echo. The wider the valley, the longer it takes for the sound to cross the valley and return. So the time between the shout and the echo can be used to indicate distance.

Get them to agree that if blindfolded in a room and someone talks to them the fact that they have two ears allows them to turn to face the talking person.

Tell them the bat combines all three to good effect, but uses "Shouts" in a frequency above our hearing range.

It emits short bursts of ultrasonic sound and listens to returning echoes. The time for the echo gives it range to target (insect?) and the pitch of the echo gives it target direction (basically moving nearer or further away). That coupled with large directional ears makes it an efficient hunter in the dark and allows it detect obstacles to be avoided (i.e make a mental "map" of its surroundings).

If you can get that much over in 10 - 15 minutes you will have done well (imo).

Edited February 1, 2011 by TonyMcC

[CharonY]

The audience will consist of Phd students, postdocs and more senior researchers in mathematical physics, but this will cover a wide range of expertise. As such, I have to be careful with what background material I assume. Also, only the bare minimum of proofs will be given. More like hints and overall game plan than detailed expose. It is all in the preprint if anyone in the audience is that interested.

 

In cases when you deal with diverse range of expertise another approach could work, if you have enough time. Essentially give the bare minimum needed to understand the concept, then declare that you are going to give more in-depth info for those interested (so that those without expertise are prepared), summarize the gist again, and move to the next topic. By stating easily, going into depth and rising back again one can provide the depth without frustrating the non-experts too much, while satisfying the experts (which, depending on the format of the talk, may actually otherwise interrupt the talk).

[Genecks]

The speech is over. It didn't go so well. But I suspect that is primarily due to the professor not replying to my emails and being ignorant (literally). There was definitely another crucial part of information the professor did not get to me, which would have answered the brunt of my questions, thus saving me a lot of time. I couldn't tell if he was being arrogant, testing me, or straight-up ignorant as to learning materials and course design. I hate this school and these professors, I really do.

 

@ ajb

 

For ajb, since you are in power of your own material and what you choose to say, I would suggest you only show as much data as you are willing to get grilled on. Only show what you're willing to talk about.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Genecks

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

What sort of information were you missing?

[Genecks]

What sort of information were you missing?

 

In a lot of ways, I didn't understand some of the diagrams from the article. I didn't understand doppler shift, despite how much I read into it. I also didn't understand many aspects of the cortical maps. There was actually something on a website that the professor put up, which he put up late. I kept asking him to put up the resources. It was like a nice 15 page discussion that basically broke down what what a lot of the terms, concepts, and physical aspects (such as doppler shift, and what it means for a bat to have a constant frequency vs. FM call) of the study were talking about.

 

When I got the information/resource, I had wished I had it a week earlier.

 

The professor is not very busy. He might be busy with his 6+ year Ph.D student who is trying to wrap up her dissertation, but other than that, he wasn't too busy.

 

The student can handle herself... maybe. My supervisor was basically telling her elementary stuff she should already know in order to do an isolation experiment with a neuron. I hope that Ph.D student isn't that dense...

 

And seeing as the information was available (I wasn't able to easily get access until a little after he assigned me my speech), he should have known it was there. Total neglect and ignorance from this guy. I was pissed.

 

Lesson learned: If someone is late giving you resources, be late giving them resources back.

 

He allowed me to have a week's worth of extension on my speech, but I didn't take it, because I believed I had enough ability to tackle the issue. The only thing I was missing, however, was critical information that he neglected to give when I probed him for it.

 

I should have taken a speech assignment to do at a later time and told him to screw himself.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Genecks

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Was this the professor's article you were presenting, or some other article the professor coincidentally had information regarding?

[Genecks]

Was this the professor's article you were presenting, or some other article the professor coincidentally had information regarding?

 

The professor picked an article, the one I attached a few posts back.

And I do not believe the information was coincidental at all.

No way, because we're talking about owls now. Last week was bats.

 

The guys who are presenting this week are talking about owls.

 

Funny enough, he seemed to have tell them that there are reading materials on the website I previously mentioned that will help them accomplish their speech. *grumble*

Edited February 2, 2011 by Genecks

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I guess I don't understand why it's the professor's responsibility to do research on the article you were assigned to research and present.

[Genecks]

The point here is that I asked for help, and I did do research. After doing enough research and not getting enough information, I asked for help.

 

I decided all of it was becoming some serious B.S. when I looked into the terminology and concepts I was going to present and looked around on the web for others who have presented the information. Funny enough, they had only presented the terms and concepts in a very brief way. And they didn't even really explain the concepts or terms enough to be adequately understood. And this was from the main flag university, too. It's similar to how the article discusses it. You can't really make out too much about what CF and the FM is unless you're in the know about those. It just mentions that bats use FM and CF, but doesn't go too much further than that. It wasn't any better than just parroting something.

 

I could have easily parroted the article and walked away.

 

After seeing that happen, I thought to myself, "Alright, this is getting ridiculous. I've looked over and over for information, and am definitely not getting what I need. Time to ask for help."

 

I had asked for those materials well enough ahead in time, of which he failed to adequately present. Furthermore, there was no research for him to really do, as he already had any data or relevant research materials gathered. There is a difference between collecting data and already having the data. He already had the data yet acted ignorant to its existence.

 

There are few reasons for a person doing that. The fact that he actively helped the other students by (and if you're claiming it's him doing the research, then we can argue that) doing the research for them by telling them what they need.

 

To help them and not me? Well, that's discrimination.

 

I think this might really be a personal situation. The professor broke protocol last semester with a situation. Let a girl sign up for a class who was a brand new transfer: They're not suppose to. I got the A grade and she got a C. Maybe he thinks I deserve punishment or something for her getting a C and me getting an A. It was a team project, and maybe he thinks I'm responsible for her failure rather than him breaking protocol.

 

It's not the first time I saw discrimination from them, as they put more emphasis on helping their grad students than anyone else accomplishing goals.

Edited February 2, 2011 by Genecks

[hypervalent_iodine]

In a lot of ways, I didn't understand some of the diagrams from the article. I didn't understand doppler shift, despite how much I read into it. I also didn't understand many aspects of the cortical maps. There was actually something on a website that the professor put up, which he put up late. I kept asking him to put up the resources. It was like a nice 15 page discussion that basically broke down what what a lot of the terms, concepts, and physical aspects (such as doppler shift, and what it means for a bat to have a constant frequency vs. FM call) of the study were talking about.

 

When I got the information/resource, I had wished I had it a week earlier.

 

The professor is not very busy. He might be busy with his 6+ year Ph.D student who is trying to wrap up her dissertation, but other than that, he wasn't too busy.

 

The student can handle herself... maybe. My supervisor was basically telling her elementary stuff she should already know in order to do an isolation experiment with a neuron. I hope that Ph.D student isn't that dense...

 

And seeing as the information was available (I wasn't able to easily get access until a little after he assigned me my speech), he should have known it was there. Total neglect and ignorance from this guy. I was pissed.

 

Lesson learned: If someone is late giving you resources, be late giving them resources back.

 

He allowed me to have a week's worth of extension on my speech, but I didn't take it, because I believed I had enough ability to tackle the issue. The only thing I was missing, however, was critical information that he neglected to give when I probed him for it.

 

I should have taken a speech assignment to do at a later time and told him to screw himself.

 

I can't really see how it is the professor's fault that you failed to understand a paper that you were meant to research into yourself. You were given a task that involved using your ability to research and present on a topic that required critical thinking - just because your professor had data that neatly explained every little detail for you doesn't mean he should be obliged to provide it. In a way it actually spoils the point of the assignment. Whether or not he helped other students as you say is, in my opinion, irrelevant. It might not be fair from an egalitarian point of view, but it is hardly the point. The fact is that you were given a paper, told to research its contents and do a presentation on it - not your professor.

 

 

As I mentioned in an earlier thread, when it comes to your work, your university experience and the people you come into contact with at your university all I have seen you do is complain about each for one reason or another. Honestly, if you are that unhappy about where you are and what you are doing, perhaps it is time to consider going somewhere else. Either that, or maybe you should start to think about whether the issue is in fact with the university, etc. or if it is with you. Just a thought (no maliciousness intended).

[ajb]

For ajb, since you are in power of your own material and what you choose to say, I would suggest you only show as much data as you are willing to get grilled on. Only show what you're willing to talk about.

 

Indeed, this is different to your task. I have the option of proactive steering away from any awkward questions. I also have the option of saying "I don't know" or "we have yet to investigate that". This will not go down so well if the answers are obviously in the paper you talk about.

 

In cases when you deal with diverse range of expertise another approach could work, if you have enough time. Essentially give the bare minimum needed to understand the concept, then declare that you are going to give more in-depth info for those interested (so that those without expertise are prepared), summarize the gist again, and move to the next topic. By stating easily, going into depth and rising back again one can provide the depth without frustrating the non-experts too much, while satisfying the experts (which, depending on the format of the talk, may actually otherwise interrupt the talk).

 

That could work quite well in general. However, the talk I have in mind will not really involve anything too technical. I have set some modest goals and think most of the audience will follow me for most of the talk.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I can't really see how it is the professor's fault that you failed to understand a paper that you were meant to research into yourself. You were given a task that involved using your ability to research and present on a topic that required critical thinking - just because your professor had data that neatly explained every little detail for you doesn't mean he should be obliged to provide it. In a way it actually spoils the point of the assignment. Whether or not he helped other students as you say is, in my opinion, irrelevant. It might not be fair from an egalitarian point of view, but it is hardly the point. The fact is that you were given a paper, told to research its contents and do a presentation on it - not your professor.

My thoughts exactly. I was assigned to do a presentation in a few weeks, and in a few days I've put together 20 reference papers. There's a bunch of statistics I don't understand, but I'm going to look it up. My professor has told several of the presenters that he is highly knowledgeable in the subjects they chose, but offered no assistance -- because it's their presentation, and his goal is to make them better presenters. They have to do the research themselves if they want to learn.

 

Incidentally, this is all being posted on a science forum where the answers to many of Genecks' questions would have been provided if he had just asked. I'd gladly explain Doppler shifts and frequency modulation. I'm sure other members would help out too. Use the resources that are right in front of you!

[A Tripolation]

I also have a presentation in a few hours. I have to succinctly explain and clarify Maxwell's equations to a group of students with only rudimentary algebra skills. So while I don't have to do complicated research, I DO have to "dumb" the material down sufficiently for it to be understood, and yet not lose any of the elegance that these equations offer as the fundamentals of classical E&M.

 

I asked around and it turns out that pictures of field lines and line integrals are by far the best way to convey it. I agree with what others have said. Genecks, I truly don't understand why you didn't ask on this forum for some help, or some other place. There are many knowledgeable people that would've gladly assisted you.

Edited February 2, 2011 by A Tripolation

[Ophiolite]

Genecks I have to echo what others have already said and I do so knowing you may react negatively and close your mind to our comments. I have read your comments and your observations carefully then reread them.

 

I then asked myself if you were an employee of mine what would I make of your attitude. How would I characterise you to a colleague who asked how you were progressing. Regretably my summary would be "He's a whiner who presently lacks the maturity to understand the world doesn't owe him a living. We'll toss him in the deep end a couple of times more, but if he doesn't change his mindset he's going to drown."

 

I am being brutal, because I think brutality may be in your best interests right now. Reflect on what I have said. If you wish to engage on these points further I am happy to do so in this thread or by pm.

[Athena]

If you are going to do public speaking, you might join a Toastmasters Club. Toastmasters Clubs make people experts in public speaking by having them speak and giving the feed back.

 

The professors chosen by The Learning Company, for their DVD's and audio tapes, are the professors who love their subject so much, their enthusiasm for the subject attracts the listener. Seriously a person who knows everything about his subject, can be so boring everyone can't wait to get out of the room. But when the speaker loves the subject and loves telling about it, the listener associates the subject with pleasure and takes a greater responsibility in the getting value out of what is being said. Do you love your subject? What motivated you to do the research? What is it about the subject that excites you? If you find what turns you on about this subject, and tune in to your own sense of pleasure, you will have the audiences attention. They will want the sensation pleasure you have.

 

Kind of like putting sugar in the medicine. Medicines are usually bitter and children refuse to take them, but put in some sugar and they will drink the whole bottle. Enjoy yourself and everyone will enjoy you.