Difference between revisions of "Some Topics to Consider When Critiquing Talks"
From LMU BioDB 2013
Kdahlquist (Talk | contribs) (→Speaking Style: added clarifiers language and delivery to heading) |
Kdahlquist (Talk | contribs) (→Visuals: added clarifier "slides" to header) |
||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
* Parallel form used as needed | * Parallel form used as needed | ||
| − | == Visuals == | + | == Visuals (Slides) == |
* Visible | * Visible | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
* Selection | * Selection | ||
* Number (not too many) | * Number (not too many) | ||
| − | * Variety | + | * Variety |
== Speaking Style (Language and Delivery) == | == Speaking Style (Language and Delivery) == | ||
Revision as of 19:06, 18 September 2013
Contents |
Overall
In general, was the talk Excellent? Very Good? Good? Fair? Poor?
Content
- Message stated
- Message clear
- Clear explanations
- Selection of information
- Amount of material
- Slow beginning
- Good science
- Balanced presentation
- Sufficient background and definitions
Organization
- Logical flow
- Clear
- 3-part framework (“Tell them what you’re going to say; say it; tell them what you said”)
- Outline (given, followed)
- Parallel form used as needed
Visuals (Slides)
- Visible
- Simple
- Emphasis on important information
- Selection
- Number (not too many)
- Variety
Speaking Style (Language and Delivery)
- Audience contact and awareness
- Eye contact
- Attitude (friendly, calm, enthusiastic, …)
- Emphasis on important information
- Knowledgeable
- Answered questions well
- Use of pointer (not circling)
- Voice (loud, soft, monotonous)
- Accent, enunciation
- Pace
- Talking (not memorizing)
- Well-prepared
- Well-practiced
