I'm slowly putting together the conference talk I'm giving this summer. As I do, something curious is happening. I'm arranging my figures, trying to decide on the best way to show my data (definitely NOT the exact same graphs we have in the almost-out-the-door manuscript....everything needs to be clear enough to digest in 10 minutes).
And as I do, I'm saying to myself, "Hmm, this graph looks good but it'd be really nice if we had one more data point to extend the range a little further and help tie it in better to the next slide." Or, "Gosh, someone might ask me whether we've ever tried this experiment under Other Conditions, and so maybe I should pop into lab and check that out."
What's funny about it is that the experiments I'm thinking of are the same ones Grad Advisor has been asking me to do for a loooong time. I've been putting her off, because the experiments in question didn't seem particularly critical to me.
But now that I'm the one who will be standing up in front of an audience of Very Important Scientists, I'm suddenly inspired to scoot back to lab and get these data.
Wacky, huh?
Label it another reason why it's good for grad students and postdocs to make platform presentations at conferences, rather than just posters. There's nothing like the fear of hand-waving your way around inadequate graphs to get you to run a few extra experiments....
15 years ago
4 comments:
The link below is to an old post on the Wordpress DrugMonkey with some suggestions on giving short conference presentations. It is much more difficult to give a good 10 minute talk than a longer presentation.
Short Seminar Skillz
Yeah, putting together a grant, paper, or talk always makes me realize which experiments I really should do. The bad thing, for me, is that this enables me to justify running off to do fun experiments--hey, I need that data, right?--instead of slogging through the grant/paper/talk.
Thanks for the link, PP--I think I'd read it a while ago but good to review now that it's very relevant. I've already eliminated the data about a different cell type that didn't add much to the talk (but is in the manuscript)....Though I think I'd disagree with your assertion that one should only show one panel's worth of data per slide. I prefer to put two or three graphs per slide (assuming room size permits visibility) so that people can ponder their relationship. But it's different in each situation, of course.
I"m with PP about one graph per slide. The cleaner a slide the more likely the audience is to focus on what you are saying.
Post a Comment