Some Topics to Consider When Critiquing Talks

From LMU BioDB 2013
Revision as of 18:38, 18 September 2013 by Kdahlquist (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

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

  • Visible
  • Simple
  • Emphasis on important information
  • Selection
  • Number (not too many)
  • Variety

Speaking Style

  • 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
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox