rules for conference presentations

Having just returned from a conference where the presentations were a little mixed – to say the least – I was reminded of the reality that conference presentations are not the same as the conference paper. The paper is the basis for the presentation, but the actual standing up and talking is something else again, something with its own conventions, opportunities and pitfalls.

The pitfalls in conference presentations are numerous – and I’ve just seen most of them. People reading their paper not looking at the audience. People with too much information packed on slides which the audience has to try to read while listening at the same time. People reading their slides verbatim, adding nothing to them. People with too many slides. People who assume that everyone in the audience is able to follow a really complex argument without any guidance. People who assume the audience is as familiar with the extant literatures and/or a specialised vocabulary as they are. People who go way over time and make it really hard for every other presenter in the session – and eat up the time for questions.

My audience experience reminded me that I’d once read Anthony Weston’s* rules for oral arguments. He wasn’t writing specifically about conferences, but about any situation where you are required to present a case in public. He was thinking about a range of situations from presenting in class to arguing a case in front of an official body to an electoral (or keynote) speech. But I think that his rules are pretty apt for conferences.

Here’s his six golden rules.

Rule One: Reach out to your audience.
Weston suggests that you have to show some enthusiasm for the topic, be respectful of the audience, be patient with them, never talk down to them. After all, he says, you are asking for a hearing, and the audience doesn’t have to give that to you. You have to do what’s required in order to get and keep their attention.

Rule Two: Be fully present.
Being there means not reading something that people can read for themselves, but engaging with the audience. This is achieved by making eye contact, speaking with expression and energy – walking around even. Even if you do read, you can still do these things. Weston reminds us that oral presentations are a face-to-face experience and that people will be dissatisfied if that’s not what they get.

Rule Three: Signpost your argument.
When people read, they can go back over the bits they don’t understand, or choose to skip over things that are difficult. Weston argues that an audience can’t do this and so they need more signposting than in a written paper – the speaker stating what the argument to come is going to be, repeating the various steps of the argument, summarising what’s just been said. He also points to the importance of the speaker making sure that they allow the audience time to follow what’s being said, to make notes if that’s what they want to do, and to make the transition from one point in the argument to another. Weston suggests that speakers need to start by saying something like – my basic argument is – and conclude with something like – I’ve argued that…

Rule Four: Offer something positive.
Weston proposes that just presenting an audience with critique leaves them feeling depressed and that the speaker needs to moderate the negativity and offer some direction forward. He doesn’t mean spin by this. I think in academic presentations this rule means making sure that the implications of the argument – the so what and now what of the presentation – are made clear at the end. There shouldn’t be the slightest opportunity for the audience to be left wondering why they needed to know what it is you have said.

Rule Five: Use visual aids sparingly
I’d probably say sensibly and sensitively here rather than sparingly. But Weston has clearly suffered from conference Powerpoint overdose and he argues that if it is used it needs to be engaging. He argues for variety in presentations rather than reliance on one medium – using a range of techniques such as inserting a short reading from a text, a bit of audience participation, the use of handouts. Above all, he says, don’t let the slide-show substitute for you.

Rule Six: End in style.
Weston says this means keeping to time and not petering out. Having a snappy ending that reinforces the major point you are making is the way to go, he suggests.

I must say that I’d be pretty pleased if more of the presenters I’ve just seen had known and taken Weston’s maxims to heart. I’d have got more from the sessions and therefore from the whole conference.

So I’ve been thinking that in future maybe these six rules could be sent out with the acceptance letters that go to all conference presenters, with all due acknowledgments to Weston, of course. Speakers would know then what’s expected and what’s good practice.

So come on conference organisers – how about it!!

Weston, A (2009) A rulebook for arguments. (4th edition) Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company

About these ads

About pat thomson

Pat Thomson is Professor of Education in the School of Education, The University of Nottingham, UK
This entry was posted in argument, audience, conference papers, conference presentation, powerpoint, so what and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to rules for conference presentations

  1. Alison says:

    Excellent reminder for all of us who present ……people have paid money to be there and have every right to be ” inspired ” to think about your content …they may not agree but you have to make a thought process happen .
    It is also great fun and for some us is a bit addictive !!!
    Good reminder
    Thanks

  2. Useful six rules – always amazes me when people think it’s OK to ‘read’ a conference paper.

  3. Terry says:

    When I gave my first ‘paper’ at a conference, I didn’t know (and was too stupid to ask anyone) what the difference was between the paper and the presentation. I instinctively knew I shouldn’t read. I am a professional actor, and would be talking about theatre practice, so I essentially wrote and learned a ‘soliloquy’, and ‘performed’ it, as I had done may times as a ‘public speaker’. It went well, but it meant that in characterising myself as an academic ‘outsider’, and not realising that the paper and the presentation were two different things, I ‘wrote’ only the presentation. There was no paper! Which was pretty silly, especially when calls came around for the publication of some of the papers for the conference, and I had nothing to show for my work.

    • pat thomson says:

      The idea of the presentation as soliloquy is pretty interesting. I wonder if it’s an unhelpful or helpful analogy.. ??(rather than the reality of your experience which I’m sure entertained which is more than many can say)

  4. Great post. I feel like a number of academics don’t place much value on aesthetics, whether it be storytelling, visual design, or personal presentation. A sizable group of people seem to think that the quality of their work will speak for itself, regardless of its aesthetic polish.

  5. Pingback: You eat first with your eyes – or, why style matters « ivry twr

  6. tcdimensions says:

    I’m heading toward my first international conference, to which I’m submitting a 7,000-word paper and giving a 20-minute (2,000-word) presentation. I’m intrigued by the difference being promoted here between the two, and by how liberally that difference might be interpreted.
    Is it legit to think of the talk as something other than a truncated and somewhat deformalised version of the paper? Is it acceptable for it to instead be a kind of ‘companion piece’, further to or complementary to the paper? Is there a danger of convenors thinking, “Hang on, this isn’t the paper we “bought”.’
    Any advice most welcome.

    • pat thomson says:

      Yes absolutely. You need to do the rationale for the paper, the focus, the methods the findings and the implications… In other words the argument in about six slides. You can highlight the relevant bits in your paper that do these or use notes on slides. It’s ok to read these if it’s your first presentation. Rehearse it so you know you fit in the time allowed… Good luck.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s