Abstract
- Top of page
- Abstract
- ASSEMBLE A SIMPLIFIED STORY
- A TALK'S STRUCTURE SUPPORTS THE STORY
- DETAILS THAT KEEP THE AUDIENCE FOCUSED
- ANTICIPATING QUESTIONS
- NAILING THE PRESENTATION
- Acknowledgements
For many scientists, their working life can be charted as a series of talks: lab meetings, journal clubs, research seminars, and job talks. Based on the sheer volume of attended and given talks, one might think that nearly any scientist should be an expert speaker. As we are all painfully aware, that's not so. Giving an effective talk is a learned skill, built largely on preparation and practice. Presented here are tips from five panelists, each known for their informative, well-organized, and engaging style: Nicole King, PhD, Michael Levine, PhD, Susan McConnell, PhD, Denise Montell, PhD, and Sean Morrison, PhD. While their advice focuses on improving research seminars (departmental seminars, society meetings, and public lectures), they also offer many helpful tips for enhancing general public speaking skills. Developmental Dynamics 239:3492–3496, 2010. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Before typing that first title slide, it is important to consider what you want to get out of the talk you are about to put together. There are many reasons to give a research talk. Often, the first that come to mind are for the purposes of advertising your work and impressing colleagues. Yet in addition to benefiting the audience, the talk can also benefit the speaker.
A talk can be an effective way to crystallize ideas, get feedback on work in progress, and build relationships with audience members who are interested in your work. Keeping the perspective that the audience is there to help you, not judge you, can be motivation for putting together a more open, honest, and genuine presentation. The approach not only flatters your audience by acknowledging their collective intelligence, but can also give your seminar a fresh and engaging air that can otherwise be hard to achieve.
ASSEMBLE A SIMPLIFIED STORY
- Top of page
- Abstract
- ASSEMBLE A SIMPLIFIED STORY
- A TALK'S STRUCTURE SUPPORTS THE STORY
- DETAILS THAT KEEP THE AUDIENCE FOCUSED
- ANTICIPATING QUESTIONS
- NAILING THE PRESENTATION
- Acknowledgements
The next step is finding a straightforward story to tell. “I believe that the most profound insights into how things work are usually simple ideas that are easily conveyed,” said Mike Levine, PhD, Professor of Cell and Molecular Biology at the University of California, Berkeley (Fig. 1). Ideally, a 12-min talk will tell one story, and a 50-min talk may include a more detailed version of that story, or a series of two or three interrelated stories. Sean Morrison, PhD, Professor of the Life Sciences Institute, University of Michigan and Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, describes his approach for focusing his talks. “I think about what question my talk should address and what the major take-home message should be. Then I frame the presentation around that question and that message.”
When deciding what supporting data to include, the “shock and awe” approach of hitting the audience with every piece data is disorienting and counterproductive. “For the purposes of a seminar, I think it is fine to ‘cherry-pick’ and show the key results that capture the points you are trying to make. Of course, it is important to note that the raw data are often more complicated than what is being presented,” said Levine. Simplifying a story can also mean leaving out technical details. “The details of how something was done are often not important but take a long time to explain. For example, how one knocks down or overexpresses a gene or protein may differ for different organisms or cell types, but the concept is all the same,” noted Denise Montell, Professor of Biological Chemistry, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. A story should contain only the minimum essential information needed to set it up and to support the conclusions.
Telling a streamlined story does not mean that a speaker should be afraid to include solid experiments that point to contradictory mechanisms. “In this case, you will want to discuss how different hypotheses are supported or refuted by each experiment. Then try to formulate a model, or two or three, which may explain your unexpected and nonintuitive results. Also describe what experiments you would do in the future to try to distinguish between your alternative models,” said Nicole King, PhD, Assistant Professor of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of California, Berkeley. “Talking about such data can be a great way to get feedback and ideas for future research.” However, she advised to leave out incomplete or inconclusive experiments for which you are not confident in the results. Ultimately, they could work to undermine the main conclusions.
Knowing who the audience will be, will dictate to what degree the story should be simplified. A talk designed for the general public should keep jargon to a minimum, and any necessary jargon should be defined. In addition, details of experimental techniques are probably not appropriate for a public audience, but may be interesting to the audience at a specialized Gordon conference. King cited an example of how her graduate advisor, Rich Losick, PhD, Professor in Molecular and Cellular Biology at Harvard, simplifies bacterial gene names. “The alphabet soup of spoIIAA, spoIIAB, and spoIIAC is reduced to A, B, and sigF, for reasons that are not worth explaining here. With those handles in place, he can worry more about communicating the interesting science, and less about whether the gene names are going to lose his audience.” It is rarely a mistake to simplify—Losick even uses the approach in seminars given to scientists.
ANTICIPATING QUESTIONS
- Top of page
- Abstract
- ASSEMBLE A SIMPLIFIED STORY
- A TALK'S STRUCTURE SUPPORTS THE STORY
- DETAILS THAT KEEP THE AUDIENCE FOCUSED
- ANTICIPATING QUESTIONS
- NAILING THE PRESENTATION
- Acknowledgements
A wave of relief may wash over the speaker after he goes through that last slide—and quickly vanish when he sees 20 hands jut up into the air. Although the question-and-answer session is impromptu in nature, a speaker may feel more at ease knowing that it has a certain amount of predictability. McConnell explained that questions tend to fall in one of three categories. The first is curiosity-based questions. These questions are about an interesting phenomenon that may or may not be addressed by the work just presented. In reply, cite work, be it yours or someone else's, that has been done or could be done to address the question. The second type of question is a misunderstanding. Reply by gently reminding the questioner of the work that was done to address this point. The third category is a statement that casts doubt on presented conclusions. In this case, stay calm and defend the work, putting up any relevant slides held in reserve. If it becomes clear that the conclusions are not rock-solid, propose ways in which they could be tested further.
Once a speaker has the chance to think about a question, it may not be as challenging to answer as it initially seemed. Therefore, rephrase a question after it has been asked. In addition to buying time to formulate an answer, it demonstrates that the speaker understands what is being asked. If despite these measures, he is still caught completely off guard, it might be best to say that he'll get back to the questioner at another time. However, when given the chance to think about it, a speaker who does careful science and prepares for obvious questions should be able to answer most questions knowledgably.