November 11, 2010
Paul Edwards: "How to give an academic talk"
My colleague Paul Edwards has been giving talks about how to give talks for over a decade now. There's a good reason he's asked so often to do it: he has very sound advice, and he's given it a lot of thought. He also has created a detailed advice handout, now in version 4. Of course, I don't agree with everything he recommends, but I do think he's right on the money on almost everything. And if train yourself to use his advice, and practice, you'll get good enough that you can make your own judgments about what works best for you and your personality.
But, for god's sake, work on your presentation skills and practice. Effective communication to an audience is not an in-born skill for most people.
Edwards on How to Give an Academic Talk
Posted by jmm at 11:47 AM | Comments (0)
<< Guidance on preparing scientific posters | Main
October 31, 2010
Guidance on preparing scientific posters
My colleague Eytan Adar recommends the following three resources to guide students on preparing scientific posters to communicate their research:
Advice on designing scientific posters, Colin Purrin, Swarthmore College (Eytan notes this is somewhat long, and he doesn't agree with all of the advice).
Poster and Presentation Resources,UNC Graduate School (this is actually a collection of several resources from various others)
Tips for Posters in the Humanities, Stanford.
Posted by jmm at 11:08 PM | Comments (0)
<< Thinking critically about social science method | Main | Paul Edwards: "How to give an academic talk" >>
March 31, 2010
Thinking critically about social science method
This is an interesting blog post by Christian Sandvig (Illinois iSchool) (via Marianne Ryan) about social science research methods. The title is hooey, but two deeper points are good ones I think -- not new, but often overlooked, and he provides some references to more complete discussions (suitable for, perhaps, use in 840, ahem).
His two main points as I see them: methods courses often focus too much on procedure, when they should focus first and foremost on research design and the nature of evidence. And, statistical significance is not substantive significance.
Posted by jmm at 10:53 AM | Comments (0)
<< Nonfiction and fiction about academic life | Main | Guidance on preparing scientific posters >>
January 21, 2010
Nonfiction and fiction about academic life
My student, Maciej Kos, found this syllabus for a course on academic work. It contains a pretty good listing of fiction and non-fiction books about academic life. (I would add to the list of novels Old Scores by Nicholas Delbanco, and several of the novels of Rebecca Goldstein, such as The Mind-Body Problem.) I have been giving a copy of James Lang's memoir Life on the Tenure Track to new junior faculty.
Blanchette, "Academic Work", Information Studies 298-C, Winter 2010, UCLA
Posted by jmm at 12:56 AM | Comments (1)
<< Simple schematic for a good talk | Main | Thinking critically about social science method >>
January 20, 2010
Simple schematic for a good talk
My colleague John King sent me the diagram below. It is an easy-to-remember schematic for how to organize a talk. Start with some context (we often say "the motivation"), drilling down until you get to your specific problem, then describe in detail your contribution in solving this problem. Finish by heading back up to the surface: return to the context, reminding your audience of the connection between your problem and the broader context, this time adding the implications of what you have discovered for the broader context. This would naturally lead into a description of your ongoing research programme on this topic, if you have one. (I advocate *against* a "future work" slide unless you are actually committed too, and probably already engaged in, the future work.)
I like this, but, at least for a seminar talk (50-80 minutes rather than the 12-18 typical at many conferences), I would precede the big donut with a smaller semi-donut, which is the left half of the big donut in miniature. That is, spend the first minute (and maybe one slide) quickly setting the scene (the context), then briefly but clearly introduce the problem you tackle, state your results (without demonstrating or supporting them, then sum up your contribution. After that brief intro, get with the more detailed context - contribution - context program.
This is very similar to the classic storytelling exposition I've elsewhere advocated. As in a typical (not post-modern) novel or movie, immediately set the scene, identify the protagonist and the conflict he or she faces. In stories the resolution (results) often aren't broadcast up front (though they may be foreshadowed), to build suspense. Sometimes that kind of suspense-building works in a scholarly talk, but often giving a sneak peak at the results is helpful / necessary in motivating the audience to be interested in what comes.
Posted by jmm at 06:13 PM | Comments (0)
<< Guide for junior academic job seekers | Main | Nonfiction and fiction about academic life >>
