Director's Blog

15th Anniversary Special Student Leadership Council Scholarships

Posted by CRI Programs   |   September 2, 2016

To celebrate CRI's 15th Anniversary, the Student Leadership Council is pleased to present three special student scholarships to be awarded to finalists of the Pecha Kucha presentation comeptition at CRI Days 2016!

Practice effective science communication delivery and participate in a peer review evaluation process through a fun, yet measured, presentation competition!

Registering and Submitting your Presentation:

  • Presenters must register for the Pecha Kucha competition for planning purposes by midnight on Monday September 19th, 2016.
  • A schedule of presentations will be released to all participants by Monday, September 26th, 2016.
  • All final presentations must be completed and submitted by email to cricourses@gmail.com by 5 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday September 28th, 2016.

Competition Details

  • All presentations must follow the timing and format of a Pecha Kucha (20 secs by 20 slides). To ensure you are within the correct time, the timing for your slide deck transitions must be automated to 20 seconds. Your presentation will be checked for the number of slides and the timing of your slide transitions prior to the competition. A buzzer will sound after 6 minutes and 40 seconds, letting you and the audience know that your presentation is over.
  • At the end of every presentation- not during the presentation- the audience, including all other presenters, will be given 2 minutes to evaluate, using an evaluation form developed from the rubric below.
  • A judging panel will be responsible for tallying the results of the audience evaluations on Friday during the student retreat. They will use the results to inform the selection of six finalists. Finalists will be announced Friday evening after dinner.
  • The finalists will present again on Saturday, immediately after lunch during the CRI Days conference. All conference attendees will complete the evaluation form for each of the six final presentations. Results will be tallied by the judging panel and the three 15th annual scholarships will be awarded at the end of the conference.

Presentation Instructions
The purpose of this presentation is to demonstrate the value of your research (or an aspect of your research) to the rest of the CRI community. Remember, this form of public speaking is very free, despite the concise structure imposed.  You are the story teller, and, in control of your audience’s experience. Because of the concise nature of the presentation, every detail (visual, auditory, intellectual) is critical to your audience. The rubric below will help you hone in on the key pieces of information you need to communicate as well as to create an objective evaluation framework. However, there is plenty of space for you to be creative in what story you tell, and how you tell it. 

Your presentation will have to cover the following points/questions in 6 minutes and 40 secs (20 seconds by 20 slides):

  • Introduce yourself and your scientific background (4 points)
  • What is the main question(s) you are working toward answering? (4 points)
  • Why is your research important to science and/or society (i.e. does it fill knowledge gaps in society or applied management, etc.)? (4 points)
  • How are you answering your research question (describe your field or lab/ study design/ tools & approaches)? (12 points)
  • Tell us about the outcomes of this research. Do you have results you can share? Have you faced challenges and if so, how have you overcome those challenges? (4 points)
  • What are the future applications or implications of your research? For example, how does your project fit within larger scale projects? (4 points)

A presentation that effectively answers these questions will make exceptional use of visual aids (images/slide design/words), precise scripting and word choice, a well thought-out organizational structure, and flawless delivery.

A few resources for effective Pecha Kucha presentations:
http://www.pechakucha.org
http://www.usc.edu/dept/education/CMMR/Pecha_Kucha_TipsResourcesExamples.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9zxNTpNMLo


Evaluation rubric to guide the preparation of your presentation and the peer review evaluation process:

Marking scheme
  4/4 2/4 1/4 0
Content
Who is doing the research
What is the scientific background of the presenter? (4)
I can precisely describe the presenter’s expertise and focus (0-10 words). I can generally describe the presenter’s background. I can make up my own description of what they do. I have no idea what the presenter’s background is.
What is the main question(s) you are working toward understanding (4) I can precisely describe the purpose of the research. I can generally describe the purpose of the research. I can make up my own description for the purpose of the research. I have no idea what the purpose of this research is.
Why is this important to science and/or society (4) I can precisely describe why this research is important. I can generally describe the issue. I can make up my own description of the importance of this research from the presentation. I have no idea why this research is important.
How are you answering your research question (describe your field or lab/ study design/ tools & approaches)? (12 total)  
Lab or field (4) I can precisely describe how the experimental approach answers the research question. This was stated as efficiently as possible drawing on appropriate visuals and use of language. I can describe the experimental approach and can see how it answers the research question; although, this was not efficiently articulated by the presenter. I can make up my own description of the experimental approach but am missing a few details. I do not understand the experimental approach or why it was used.
Study design (4) I can precisely describe the study design. This was stated as efficiently as possible drawing on appropriate visuals and language. I can generally describe the study design. However, this was not efficiently articulated by the presenter efficiently articulated by the presenter. I can make up my own description of the study design but am missing a few details. I do not understand the study design.
Measurements collected (4) I can precisely describe the measurements collected by this study. This was stated as efficiently as possible drawing on appropriate visuals and language. I can generally describe the measurements collected. However, this was not efficiently articulated by the presenter. I can make up my own description of measurements collected but am missing a few details. I do not understand the measurements collected.
Tell us how this research has worked out? Do you have results you can share? Have you faced challenges and if so, how have you overcome those challenges? (4) I can precisely describe the outcome of this research (results or challenges). This was stated as efficiently as possible drawing on appropriate visuals and language. I can generally describe the outcomes of this research. However, this was not efficiently articulated by the presenter. I can make up my own description of the outcomes of this research but am missing a few details. I do not understand the outcomes of this research.
How does your research fit into the bigger picture? For example, how does your project fit within larger scale projects? What are the future applications or implications of your research?
(4)
I can precisely describe how this research fits into the bigger picture. This was stated as efficiently as possible drawing on appropriate visuals and language. I can generally describe how this research fits into the bigger picture. However, this was not efficiently articulated by the presenter. I can make up my own description of how this research fits into the bigger picture but am missing a few details. I have no idea how this research fits into the bigger picture.
Presentation
Timing & number of slides 20 secs per 20 slides- use the automatic timing function on your slide show. Disqualified
Visual aids, slide designs, animations, text, & graphics (4) Slides were professional looking, visually appealing, appropriate background & transitions, text/font formatting enhances readability. Graphics were well placed & sized, complements & enhances content, seamlessly integrated. I have no possible improvements. Most visual aids were relevant and attractive. I can suggest some minor improvement. Such as 1 or 2 changes to the following; colour choice, images or graphics, use of text, grammar or spelling. Some visual aspects of the presentation were good but I can suggest a number of improvements. Such as 3 or more changes to the following; colour choice, use of text, grammar or spelling. This was not a visually appealing or informative presentation.
Presentation script (4) Every word used during the presentation had purpose, no extra words, or overly complicated vocabulary or sentences were included. No ums or ahhs were used. Most of the script was good. I noticed: 1 – 2 times that unnecessary words (ums or ahs), or complicated sentences were used. Some aspects of the script were good but I noticed 3 or more of the following:  unnecessary words (ums or ahs), or complicated sentences. The use of language in this presentation was poor.
Organization/
Structure (4)
The structure of the presentation was logical and easy to follow. The structure of the presentation was reasonable. I got lost here or there. I understand where the presentation was going but the order was mixed up. The structure of the presentation was confusing.
Delivery (4) The delivery of the presentation was flawless. The flow of language was smooth and the script did not seem to be memorized. For the voice, the volume, modulation, expression, pace, tempo, diction, enunciation was appropriate. The speaker made eye contact with the audience and was generally professional. The delivery of the presentation had minor errors and 1 – 2 improvements could be suggested. The delivery of the presentation had a few major errors (3 or more) that took away from the overall appeal of the presentation. The delivery of the presentation needed a lot of practice
Overall
Pretend you are a funder of this research, are you satisfied with your investment? (4) Absolutely, no questions asked. Yes, I have a few minor details I would like clarified but generally I am satisfied. I think so, I will need more information. No.
My overall opinion of this presentation is (4) Excellent Very Good Good Needs Work

 

Subscribe to the Blog

Recent Comments

There are no comments for this entry yet. Be the first.

Leave a Comment