Some Topics to Consider When Critiquing Talks
From LMU BioDB 2013
Revision as of 18:37, 18 September 2013 by Kdahlquist (Talk | contribs)
Contents |
Overall
In general, was the talk Excelent? 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
