Improving quality of speakers

Speakers - keynote, invited, papers, etc. - are an important part of any conference. While I enjoy participative learning, I greatly enjoy listening to a presentation by someone who has obviously thought deeply about a subject. An engaging speaker is a great contribution to a conference. I reject the notion that all learning has to be active discussion :). Sitting and listening, when the subject is provocative and the speaker is well informed, is a great learning experience.

Which leads me to my question: how do we improve the quality of speakers? Many conferences - especially those with an academic slant - spend significant effort reviewing papers. And then ignore the presentation aspect. I think conferences should spend time developing their presenters the same way they spend time developing research-focused quality writing. But how would we go about doing that?

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by DolorsCapdet on February 18, 2009 at 8:08pm: Hi George,

I agree with you on the importance of listening and that the quality of narrative written loses value. In fact, I think we move towards a visual and symbolic narrative.

However I'm not so much in the preparation of the speakers. It is true that improves the shape but not always the content (message).

A successful conference depends on the creativity of the speakers, which is innate in some people and it is very difficult to prepare in others.

Anyway, the rationale for the conference has changed. Traditionally was a source of knowledge and a way to stay up to date on the latest trends. Today it is not necessarily so. Therefore, I again agree with you on the need to improve the model.

As for online conferences, a fact that surprises me: I see that in North America, the attendees expose their view points parallel to the presentation. In contrast, in the Spanish speaking world is not so. We are more interested in knowing the views of the experts.

Best regards,; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Craig De Jong on June 23, 2009 at 10:09pm: I agree. Day 1 for speakers that I viewed was a bust. The keynote used an overhead at a Tech Conference. I find the sessions to be brief summaries of research, and most speakers are not captivating, nor is any quality discussion generated. Here is hoping for Day 2; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by George Siemens on June 23, 2009 at 11:59pm: Hi Craig - thanks for the comments...changing presentation approaches is a long term challenge :(. We tried offering a bit of guidance to the conference this year, but it will obviously require a bit more focus. I too attended sessions where research (good research, I might add) summaries were provided. Had the speaker focused on discussion questions, tried to foster discussion, etc., I think the research would have been better received...

George

Craig De Jong said:
I agree. Day 1 for speakers that I viewed was a bust. The keynote used an overhead at a Tech Conference. I find the sessions to be brief summaries of research, and most speakers are not captivating, nor is any quality discussion generated. Here is hoping for Day 2; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by George Siemens on June 24, 2009 at 12:05am: Hi Liz - I too disagreed with the assertions about audio. I am aware of research that states we learn differently via different media (and this is the heart of cognitive load theory). Audio, video, text, games, simulations, etc are all tools within an educators tool kit. Too narrow a selection and quality of learning (and engagement of learners) can be sacrificed.

In defense of the opening keynote, I will say I appreciate challenging, provocative assertions. Agree or disagree with Tara, she started people thinking and discussing. That's perfect for a keynote.

A panel of "for" and "against" would have presented a more nuanced assessment of learning with technology. It's easy to be critical about new tools/approaches. It's much harder to recognize underlying trends and reposition educational practices on firm (not passing fad) foundations.

Liz Falconer said:
Yes, I broadly agree too about today. Re the keynote, I have real accessibility concerns about the idea of focussing on sound as a major learning technology. I do think that there are dangers in concentrating on any one particular medium, as it can be very difficult to accommodate disabled students and give them an equivalent learning experience if the teaching and learning strategy focusses upon the particular attributes of one medium.; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lisa M Lane on July 7, 2009 at 6:45pm: I too enjoy listening (actively listening) to good speakers and presenters. For some people who have a lot to contribute, however, presentation may not be what they want to do, or it isn't what they do best. At Ed-Media, James Morrison, who I think we all assumed would be presenting, did an active learning, collaborative exercise instead. I know any number of instructors who are great at this kind of thing, but do not handle "speaking" that well.

You did a great job inviting engaging, charismatic speakers to Ed-Media, so whatever you did there, you can do it again. And you did provide an online synchronous opportunity for speakers to prepare. Plus, simply attending a conference and seeing good speakers like this should provide enough modeling for others.

There might also be some combination approaches, like you all did with speaking, then Q&A hour. This enabled true discussion after the speaker had given his/her deep ideas.

Another option would be to provide materials preparation assistance for invited keynote speakers, especially those who one knows have great ideas but are boring presenters. With all these ed tech degree'd folks running around, maybe conference organizers could get a volunteer?

I think it is also more difficult for speakers to get a good audience these days, as we all Twitter and check our email while s/he speaks. Many of us are used to people taking notes, doodling or nodding and smiling, but now we all pay more attention to our gadgets. It takes a certain sort of person to either be OK with that, or to ask for a helper to make such interactions part of the talk.

Lisa; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by George Siemens on July 7, 2009 at 11:01pm: Hi Lisa - thanks for your comments. I think it takes a shift in mindset/culture in higher education before we value presentation skills more broadly. Presenting one's ideas creatively and in an engaging manner is an important literacy. But we don't build these skills into the development of academics. It's almost like we assume it is a natural skill: if you have it, great! if not, too bad.

We invest much effort in developing writing skills in undergrads and grad students. We need to put as much effort in assisting them to develop skills to communicate well.

Agree about the difficulty of grabbing and audience's attention with Twitter, blogging, searching, etc. going on during presentations :).

Glad to hear you found the presentations engaging at ED-MEDIA. I quite enjoyed being an audience member!; ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lisa M Lane on July 10, 2009 at 8:32pm: I will say that at our college, several of our faculty in Communications are definitely emphasizing expressing ones ideas creatively and effectively using technology. Our students are required to take at least one Communications class for even a two-year degree (prior to transfer to university). Perhaps we'll see this kind of approach bear fruit at conferences! :-); ▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Dallas McPheeters on July 11, 2009 at 5:19pm: This is a great question and well worth our consideration as future big thinkers in the ed. tech. community. Recently I visited http://www.presentationzen.com and found a link to an exemplary presentation by famed biologist Bonnie Brassler (http://www.ted.com/talks/bonnie_bassler_on_how_bacteria_communicate...). Her presentation on a complex topic to a broad audience is simply jaw-dropping.

PresentationZen.com uses Brassler's presentation to demonstrate the value of simplicity of visuals as well as asking rhetorical questions relevant to the audience's need to understand and apply what is being heard.

Equally pertinent to this discussion is the list of Adult Learner characteristics from page 61 of Morrison, Ross, and Kemp's "Designing Effective Instruction" textbook. I found this list to be descriptive of professional development settings. Examples include... Be prepared and don't waste time. Be clear about what will be covered and accomplished and what practical information learners are expected to take home. Allow for collaborative participation from beginning through assessment.

Relevance and ease of application are my two main concerns when presenting for Professional Development (PD). These rules hold true in my experience based on the past year of weekly PD mtgs I either attended or led.

For Social Networks, would be best to post agendas and outlines in advance and allow commenting and question forming to begin ahead of time.; ▶ Reply to This