Good Work Deserves a Good Presentation

Once again i find the AERA annual meeting engaging and worthwhile. I gladly yield to the seductive pull of passionate people sharing what they know and do.

And, as usual, i have seen some really smart people give some really bad presentations.

Speakers talking at onehundredmilesanhour to squeeze in everythingtheywant tosay. Speakers going substantially over their allotted time. Speakers showing slides with paragraphs full of words in small unreadable type. Speakers standing facing the screen instead of facing the audience.

I think we can do better.
Most presentation problems can be solved by rehearsing in advance.

Timing. Practice your presentation before you come to the conference. Use a watch or stopwatch. If necessary, shorten your talk to allow you to speak at a normal relaxed pace and still hit the high points. When a speaker goes over time, that cheats the others and makes the audience restless.

Visuals. Powerpoint slides work best when they are simple and colorful. Paragraphs of words and complex tables are neither colorful nor simple. Save those for handouts or downloadable PDFs. You know those details, we don’t and we must fight to grasp everything while you’re saying something else.

Audience engagement. We would rather see your face than your back. If you read from your projected slides, we cannot see your face. And reading from the screen makes it appear that you don’t know your stuff. Write your main points on index cards, hold them in your hand, and face your audience.

Videotape yourself and critique. Use a smartphone or generic videocam to record your practice presentations. Check for the above points. Practice and record again until you’re comfortable with the way you come across.

If your work is important enough to present, it’s worth presenting well.

Social media for researchers and academics

Here’s my presentation for the AERA 2012 communication workshop i cohosted with friend and colleague Ron Dietel of UCLA CRESST. I suggest things to consider when planning to use social media to share research findings with non-specialist audiences and the media.

Improve Communication: Think Visually

Book Review
Blah Blah Blah: What to Do When Words Don’t Work.
By Dan Roam.
Portfolio/Penguin Books, 2011.  350 p.

Nothing helps us see a vague idea more clearly than trying to draw it out.

Dan Roam is all about clear communication, and his two previous books make that very clear.

His previous two books, The Back of the Napkin and  Unfolding the Napkin: The Hands-On Method for Solving Complex Problems with Simple Pictures, also demonstrate how we do ourselves a disservice by limiting our communication to words.

This book expands on his central idea that we can, and should, communicate much more clearly by drawing simple pictures to help us clarify our message.

Throughout eons of human development, Roam says, our ability to think has evolved along two different paths. One path specialized in seeing the world as lots of little pieces (Roam’s fox character, clever, witty, and linear), while the other path specialized in looking at the world as a whole (Roam’s hummingbird character, quick, exuberant, and spatial).

Only in the past 5,000 years did we begin the gradual shift to writing words. Now that we find ourselves facing some of the most difficult challenges of all time, we suddenly realize that “we’ve lost half our mind.”

With simple and very clear illustrations, he demonstrates how we can “get our visual mind back” by combining our our piece-by-piece (fox) and all-at-once (hummingbird) views.

In words and pictures, Roam illustrates Einstein’s theory of relativity, the evolution of Starbuck’s coffee from Peet’s, Bernie Madoff’s investment scams, Coca-Cola’s marketing of VitaminWater, the history of the SAT test, and the development of communication from cave wall paintings to the alphabet.

Characters who make informative appearances include Leno and Conan, The Medicis and the Rothschilds, Abraham Maslow, Leonardo da Vinci, Edwin Land, and Dmitri Mendeleyev.

When Roam began The Back of the Napkin about five years ago, he started by asking, “If simple visuals are so powerful, why don’t more people use them?” Then he later realized his starting question was only half-right. The question isn’t “Why don’t more people think with pictures?,” because we DO think in pictures, all the time. The real question is, “Why have we forgotten that?” Blah Blah Blah is his answer.

As in The Back of the Napkin, Roam offers tools to make it easier for us to think about and share complex ideas. The Napkin tools focused almost entirely on the pictorial, but the tools in this book show us how to combine our visual and verbal minds.

One fundamental premise of this book is that we don’t need all the customary blah-blah-blah to get our message across. Regardless of what we want to say, we can make any idea clear and compelling, both to our audience and to ourselves. By learning to engage both our verbal mind and our visual mind we can improve any piece of communication.

Every good idea can be made clearer,  every missing idea can be found, and every misleading or fraudulent idea can be exposed.

Communicating research more effectively

Students and faculty who plan to attend the AERA Annual Meeting this year may be interested in a communications professional development course.

A half-day workshop, Communicating research through effective presentations, social media, and writing, will focus on these sometimes neglected skills.

Instructors will be Ron Dietel, assistant director for research use and communications at UCLA’s National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST);  Barbara McKenna, Communications Director for the School Redesign Network at Stanford University and for the Leadership for Equity and Accountability in Districts and Schools (LEADS); and Paul Baker, senior communicator at the Wisconsin Center for Education Research (WCER).

The syllabus is here

The course blog is here

The course Ning is here

Registration information is here

Communicating education research

Over the years I’ve fielded calls from Frank Schultz, an education reporter for the Janesville (Wis.) Gazette. “Paul, I’m working on a story about (_____). What does education research say about it?”  Frank is good at providing feedback on articles I publish in a quarterly newsletter too. He recently reacted to a story about assessment practices in Wisconsin schools, and ended with this observation:

“. . . In any case, the article makes some sense to me because I have heard similar talk from some edu-doctors around here. Maybe someone should research how to communicate education concepts with the public.”

Frank makes a very good point. There is a lot of room for improvement.  Researchers often seem to live on a different planet from classroom teachers, not to mention the man in the street.

Speaking as a communicator, I can report on a few efforts to bridge the gap, both continuing and sporadic.

Members of the American Educational Research Assn. have two interest groups to address communication issues:  Communication of Research and Research Use.

AERA’s Communication and Outreach Committee presents panels at each year’s annual meeting on communicating education research to the public. I have helped organize this panel for the past 2 or 3 years. We gather newspaper reporters, bloggers, and researchers to speak about communication from their perspective.

In my own work I take cues from my friends in science, including the Natl. Assn. of Science Writers and the AAAS and the NSF.  Last year I attended their joint conference on science research communication and can recommend it.

The Education Writers Association, which serves reporters, editors, and higher ed communicators, holds workshops throughout the year and an annual conference. I’ve benefited from getting to know reporters and other higher ed people and look forward to the next conference in April.

In our own state, WCER hosts leaders of Wisconsin’s Cooperative Educational Service Agencies (CESAs) annually for a one-day conference. Researchers share their recent work with CESA staff and productive conversation ensues; sometimes new partnerships form.

So what I describe is a mix of research and practice. Frank’s original point remains, though:  The field of education communication is ripe for more research on what’s effective.

Wanted: Ambassadors for Science

Unscientific America:
How scientific illiteracy threatens our future.
By Chris Mooney & Sheril Kirshenbaum
Basic Books, 2009.  209 pages.

Elected leaders point to a heavy snowfall in Washington, D.C. and claim that refutes the claims of global warming.

Forty-six percentage of Americans subscribe to young-Earth creationism.

Scientific research refutes the contention that vaccines cause autism in children. But every time a new study comes out on the subject, the parents and their supporters have a “scientific” answer that allows them to retain their beliefs.

Many people get their “science” from celebrities, friends, and a few non-mainstream doctors who continue to challenge the scientific consensus.

Where is today’s Carl Sagan?

As science awaits the next Great Communicator (Neil deGrasse Tyson is one possibility) this book considers other avenues for bringing useful and accurate information about science to the news media, political and cultural leaders, and the general public.

The authors have communicated about science for quite a long time. Chris Mooney hosts the Point of Inquiry podcast and is author of The Republican War on Science. Sheril Kirshenbaum is a member of the Webber Energy Group at the University of Texas-Austin and is a former congressional science fellow.

Their lively book discusses the rifts between science and the major subcultures that shape our thinking—politics, news media, entertainment, and religion. It then proposes ways to bridge these rifts.  Mooney & Kirshenbaum argue that the burden of bridge-building rests with scientists and their professional organizations. For science to attain its deserved place at the table of public discourse, several things must happen.

Universities must reward scientists for public outreach and communication. University science programs should offer a more interdisciplinary education that unites scientific culture with communication and mass culture.

Scientists and their organizations must learn to make their knowledge politically relevant. They must learn to negotiate the halls of Congress as skillfully as any other interest group.

Film and television are massively powerful media and can be used to misinform. Scientists must learn how to wield these media, and for virtuous purposes (Randy Olson is doing a good job).

Although science and religion seem to clash regularly, the official position of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science is that faith and science are compatible. The scientific method in no way rules out the possibility of entities or causes outside of nature; it simply stipulates that they will not be considered within the framework of scientific inquiry.  Besides, the authors say, scientists might benefit from more conciliatory exchanges with the religious community:  The faithful have a vast store of knowledge about what it takes to motivate people, create community, and bring about social change.

Reconnecting science and our society will require mobilizing a new workforce, the authors say. The higher education science “pipeline” should generate more “science ambassadors” who can engage in outreach. At the same time, pro-science activists need to help. This can occur through communication with politicians,  the news media, the entertainment industry, and religious organizations.

As universities trains more scientists, also ensure they learn more about politics and the media. Scientists need communication skills to act as culture-crossers who engage in outreach.

Communicating research through mass media

Here’s a gold mine of ideas how researchers can communicate more effectively with the public, via print, broadcast, and online media.

At the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association in Denver we heard from two researchers and two media people. The topic of the panel session was “Crafting your work for a general audience: Researchers and the mass media.”

scott jaschik

Scott Jaschik, InsideHigherEd.com  “You guys are losing the battle for ideas and you are largely ignored.”
Watch video

holly yettick

Holly Yettick, formerly with Rocky Mountain News.  “How education journalists and bloggers decide which topics to cover.”
(Holly is author of the report “The Research that Reaches the Public: Who Produces the Educational Research Mentioned in the News Media?”)  Watch video

marc lamont hill

Marc Lamont Hill, Teachers College, Columbia. “Operating in these public spheres is legitimate work and necessary work.”
Watch video

jonathan zimmerman

Jonathan Zimmerman, NYU Steinhardt. “Being an Op-Ed writer has made me a much better historian and a much better academic”
Watch video

Science communicators and researchers talk shop

About 45 communicators and as many scientists gathered yesterday in Boulder to participate in a communication workshop jointly sponsored by the National Science Foundation, Academy for the Advancement of Science, National Center for Atmospheric Research, and the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research. We discussed social media, science journalism, and best uses of video. I met some fellow Tweeters face to face for the first time, and came away very enthusiastic about the opportunities for me to incorporate new practices into my work. I reproduce here a slightly edited collection of Tweets from those attending the conference. You’ll find some potentially useful links here too.

It was great to see confirmation that our conversation was being observed in real time from the outside world:  @tiffanylohwater chimed in: “Reading live tweets from Communicating Science workshop at in Boulder since I’m missing this one!”

My notes first, then the perhaps more informed ones from my Tweeting colleagues.

Communicators can help researchers strengthen proposals RE impact of work

Jeff Nesbit, NSF: the science media landscape changing rapidly gatekeepers going away, need to engage public directly

Karen Sandberg, NSF: America Competes Act strengthening reqs for ‘broader impact’

Molly McElroy: Communicating science as imp as doing the research

Nesbit: CNN has no staffer to cover science More need to engage public directly

Nesbit: crucial to show public support in order to get $$ for science communication. NSF creating

reply

Nesbit: crucial to show public support in order to get $$ for science communication. #aaas #ucar NSF creating & syndicating its own sci content.

Nesbit: national media betting on iPad as delivery platform

Nesbit: nearly impossible to reach mass audiences. Advertisers know it. Importance of engaging niche audiences

NSF helps fund science coverage w/ media science partners US news, PBS news hour, NBC, others & transparency is very imp.

www.aaas.org/communicatingscience

And these posts from Kristen E. Asmus, Managing Editor, Geological Society America, aka @Colo_kea

“Regional network of science communicators” -can we really form this/support each other? Let’s find out! (quarterly mtgs?)

introducing myself -tweeting for Geological Society of America as Managing Editor GSA Today & CHIEF tweeter  )

media advisory 09-032 Online Deception http //bit.ly/dvS4MQ

Awesome! Do you get to post it online? (the video)

At a meeting on communicating science, only 6 ppl tweeting – has it not caught on, or is it thought to be rude?

Burning through the notepad paper here — gonna have lots of AI (action items) to go through!

check out “metal foam” http //bit.ly/aVNkJl video http //bit.ly/au2QSr & women role models http //bit.ly/a1zkF2

Digital science A-Z for science communicators –yes! Let’s get that workshop going!

Free podcast/audio editing software http //audacity.sourceforge.net/

If most science agencies are short-staffed on comm officers, how will generating more coverage be handled? Overwhelm or growth?

Interested in Web 2.0 to get your msg across? I recommend http //bit.ly/aiUJSY

National Science Digital Library http //bit.ly/vjrzg “always interested in contributions”

Worked w/nervous scientist who had never talked to reporters…”What do I say? How should I act?” I said, just be yourself.

YOU can get something on NSF’s Web site “We will do our best to get it up” on the site. Acc to Josh Chamot, NSF

And these posts from The Geological Society of America aka @geosociety

“Regional network of science communicators” -can we really form this/support each other? Let’s find out! (quarterly mtgs?)

– send us anything that is TRUE with URL and a picture (for Science 360)

@NSF_GEO @NSF @AAAS_News @AtmosNews Thanks for hosting today’s communicating science workshop! Many ideas sparked!

Check out Science Nation http //www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/science_nation/

demo of Science Education Engineering & Innovation site http //bit.ly/cIgMhc (expand)

Fired up by seminar/workshop on communicating science Lots of ideas coming my way!

Good question -how do we get images to “preserve for future research”? Will you share your images of geologic interest?

Here’s a link to NEON (mentioned in ) http //www.neoninc.org/

Here’s one digital library http //www.dlese.org/library/index.jsp

Link to Science 360 http //news.science360.gov/files/

Lots of people here have only one person or too few persons in their communications departments – significance? OK, not OK?

National Science Digital Library http //bit.ly/vjrzg “always interested in contributions”

We need to learn how to add videos to our outreach to encourage interest and understanding of science & engineering

And these posts from Stephanie Chasteen aka @sciencegeekgirl

Many people don’t realize the power of audio — info on the go. But I’m a radio geek & podcaster, so biased.

keep tweeting, some of us went to PIO session but are interested in what’s going on over in that room.

Currently in the AAAS Communicating Science workshop in Boulder. Not sure of the best hashtags…

ISE grants R major grants, & hard 2 get, sadly. Usually need partnerships. RT @ ISE grants http //bit.ly/ctIJl9

Overworked AP science news reporter Seth Hornstein tells PIOs not to contact him, instead go to Science360.

Project Tomorrow SpeakUp survey — kids do NOT trust .gov domains anymore! Gov is no longer trusted source.

Reuters doesn’t cover any science and AP barely covers any. NSF ScienceLive tries to fill gap.

SciCom workshop – many PIO’s are particularly interested in video & social media. Video’s great, but what about audio?

Science360 – NSF funded site gathers tidbits from various sources (blogs, PIO’s). Doesn’t need to be NSF funded.

And these from Sophia Bliu aka @sophiabliu

Ask for audience questions near the beginning of talk then go back to their questions at end to create engagement earlyon

At a workshop on Communicating Science at http //twitpic.com/1jepwj

Avoid saying “intuitive” or “as we all know” – We can’t make assumptions about our audience

Be careful about playing games w/ the audience, an inherent test in the message may not be liked by most, i’m not in school

Don’t over simplify but balance it w/ specificity, determine what detail is necessary, sometimes the detail makes the story

Good messages are miniature, memorable, and meaningful (alliteration helps -) and 3 points help

I volunteered to be videoed and share my message about my research, a nerve-wracking but valuable experience

It is rewarding to see your work is relevant to society and is of interest to society at large.

Most scientists are introverted and need some quiet time before and after their talks

The golden moment for audience attention is the first 3 minutes and at your conclusions, make them memorable with a msg

The more you can get a picture in my head of your message the better

The public uses the word “theory” and “models” different than scientists do, avoid using these words

Think about how you react to audience questions and be comfortable just saying “I don’t know”

To not get misquoted or misinterpreted, ask the reporter to repeat your response and just repeat you main message

Use your body as a prop to direct attention in strategic ways

Improving presentation style: Good summer reading

I’m just back from a week in Paris. Having visited the Louvre, the Picasso museum, the Pompidou Center, and the Rodin museum, I’m feeling visually inspired. Now I’m talking with one of our graphic designers about cooking up a one-hour lunch time brownbag on the topic: “How to make better presentations.”

My friend Ron Dietl at UCLA’s CRESST is quite the evangelist on this topic and we have presented together.

Like you, we have seen so many potentially good presentations spoiled by godawful slide decks, not only on campus but at regional and national conferences: Slide after slide of bullet points and dense text. Research shows that text-heavy slides do *not* reinforce what the speaker is saying; this practice actually distracts the audience by messing with short-term memory and thus retention.

Our artist, Janet, and I are planning a workshop for researchers about presenting ideas graphically, and telling stories with pictures.

I’m proposing that we cite some of the fabulous ideas in these books

Presentation Zen

slide:ology

Beyond Bullet Points

The Back of the Napkin

Rodin, Picasso, and the Louvre have nothing to worry about. But maybe this exercise will add to effective communication of research.

Educommunicators name priorities for 2009

Patrick Riccards‘  poll of education communicators shows that they would like the Educommunicators organization in 2009 to spotlight communications best practices (67.1%) and discuss ways to use new media (64.6%). Responding members said the best medium for Educommunicators to engage marketing communications professionals is, by far, still email (60%).

Major challenges facing education communicators include using new technologies in a strategic way (62.4%), thinking long-term and staying on a strategic course (43.9%), and maintaining conversations with stakeholders (41.5%).

Respondents’ communications areas of expertise were media relations (59.5%), community relations (50.6%), marketing (44.3%), public affairs (38%) and research (38%).

They said the most important tools for effective communications were the right message (43.8%) and a strong network of contacts (26.3%).

Read more survey results at Educommunicators