We focused this week on editing our papers, writing our scripts, and composing our slides. I want to thank Audrey, Kimy, and Amaan for helping in this final round of editing to improve my paper.
When translating this paper into a script, it was incredibly hard to cut down words and consolidate information. I still need to do more cutting down, so if my commenters this week could help me with that that would be great. I am aiming for around 1,500 words given the short time limit.
In terms of the rubric, so far I think I have achieved rubric row 1 for sure in my script. I have my research question, method, and conclusion explicitly stated in the script. This part of the rubric, I think, represents basically the essence of the project, making sure you include all these parts because if you don't then you don't really have a research paper. I also think I do a good job on rubric row 2, as I explain the limitations and implications of my results in great detail, elaborating on what I could improve one and what future directions of research could be. This rubric is especially important to show the understanding of your project in all facets: its strengths, its limitations, and its significance to the future of the academic sphere.
Rubric row 3 is where I will need the most help in consolidating while still expressing the criteria. To achieve points for row 3, I need to explain how my beliefs changed due to the results of my research. I feel like this row is what I spend the most words on, and it is very important to have in my presentation, but I need help on cutting it down. In fact, I feel like I say how my hypothesis changed from predicting how children would do better to the actual result of children doing better multiple times throughout the script. That is something from my paper I need to change for the sake of time, as in the paper I had space to integrate the significance of the conclusion throughout the results and discussion section. Not only was my hypothesis disproved, but also an assumption I made about females and males doing the same with NFT was proved wrong and needs to be addressed in a concise manner. This rubric row of reflection is certainly very important to the presentation, as it shows your logical process in reaching your conclusion based on how effective and related your methods are. This row encompasses justification of your method, the role of your literature review in establishing your predictions and inspirations for research, and finally the significance of your research as a whole.
Rubric row 5 deals with presenting and the PowerPoint. In terms of my slides, I tried to keep the words minimal and added pictures where I thought people could use clarification (what NFT looks like, places on brain I focused on, things like that). But getting feedback on the slides will really help me see if they are interesting and adding value to the presentation as a whole.
With the rubric rows in mind, I tried to limit my literature review in my script as much as possible to leave more room for the explanations of my methods and results. I wanted to only emphasize how I reached my hypothesis, so I cut out a lot of the details about the benefits and limitations of medication and tried to showcase the difference in symptoms between adults and children and the main limit of NFT: how it unevenly treats certain symptoms of ADHD. I do need help in cutting down this part even more, as I feel like my script is still too long to fit into 15 minutes, especially since I want to not talk so fast people can't understand.
I hope with this coming week of editing I can get the script cut down and get feedback on my slides to ensure I can have a great presentation.
Word Count: 673
When translating this paper into a script, it was incredibly hard to cut down words and consolidate information. I still need to do more cutting down, so if my commenters this week could help me with that that would be great. I am aiming for around 1,500 words given the short time limit.
In terms of the rubric, so far I think I have achieved rubric row 1 for sure in my script. I have my research question, method, and conclusion explicitly stated in the script. This part of the rubric, I think, represents basically the essence of the project, making sure you include all these parts because if you don't then you don't really have a research paper. I also think I do a good job on rubric row 2, as I explain the limitations and implications of my results in great detail, elaborating on what I could improve one and what future directions of research could be. This rubric is especially important to show the understanding of your project in all facets: its strengths, its limitations, and its significance to the future of the academic sphere.
Rubric row 3 is where I will need the most help in consolidating while still expressing the criteria. To achieve points for row 3, I need to explain how my beliefs changed due to the results of my research. I feel like this row is what I spend the most words on, and it is very important to have in my presentation, but I need help on cutting it down. In fact, I feel like I say how my hypothesis changed from predicting how children would do better to the actual result of children doing better multiple times throughout the script. That is something from my paper I need to change for the sake of time, as in the paper I had space to integrate the significance of the conclusion throughout the results and discussion section. Not only was my hypothesis disproved, but also an assumption I made about females and males doing the same with NFT was proved wrong and needs to be addressed in a concise manner. This rubric row of reflection is certainly very important to the presentation, as it shows your logical process in reaching your conclusion based on how effective and related your methods are. This row encompasses justification of your method, the role of your literature review in establishing your predictions and inspirations for research, and finally the significance of your research as a whole.
Rubric row 5 deals with presenting and the PowerPoint. In terms of my slides, I tried to keep the words minimal and added pictures where I thought people could use clarification (what NFT looks like, places on brain I focused on, things like that). But getting feedback on the slides will really help me see if they are interesting and adding value to the presentation as a whole.
With the rubric rows in mind, I tried to limit my literature review in my script as much as possible to leave more room for the explanations of my methods and results. I wanted to only emphasize how I reached my hypothesis, so I cut out a lot of the details about the benefits and limitations of medication and tried to showcase the difference in symptoms between adults and children and the main limit of NFT: how it unevenly treats certain symptoms of ADHD. I do need help in cutting down this part even more, as I feel like my script is still too long to fit into 15 minutes, especially since I want to not talk so fast people can't understand.
I hope with this coming week of editing I can get the script cut down and get feedback on my slides to ensure I can have a great presentation.
Word Count: 673
Hey Sunskruthi! For your script, I think that you had a lot of good information included in there; however, I agree that a significant amount of it needs to go. I know that you mentioned that you wanted to get the script down to 1500 words, but if you speak at the average rate of 150 words per minute, then you should be fine if it is between 2000-2200 words. When reading through the script, I think that your lit review and methods are where most of the information can probably be taken out. In your lit review, I wrote a comment about the specific things that you should talk about, but in general I said that you should focus mainly on defining ADHD, discussing the symptoms, and discussing the treatment options available so that you can move on to the other sections, since that section should only be about 3 minutes long. Also, for the results, I do not think that you need to be nearly as specific with your description of the statistical measures you used. Instead, I think you should give a general overview of what you did and focus more on the implications of using the methods that you did.
ReplyDeleteNow, moving onto the slides. Overall, I thought that you did a pretty good job with the slides. My biggest problem with them was when you would put two separate images or graphs onto the same slide. To me, I thought that using this method kind of distracted the audience from looking at the specific figure that you wanted them to be paying attention to. Besides that though, I liked the presentation. Anyways, keep on working hard and good luck with the rest of your project!
SUNSKRUTHIIIIII!!!!! This is my first time familiarizing myself completely with your project; however, it does seem like really cool stuff! I agree with you and brian in regards to the length of your script: it has way too many words. You said that the total time was about 20 minutes but that was reading it and not reciting it so I would think it would be more like 22-25 minutes. Since you also need time for oral defense, I would definitely cut down on words. The places you could probably cut down the most are in the beginning and the results/methods. I see that you tend to treat your presentation too much like the paper and thus go into more depth than needed. For example, you just need brief context and not an entire lit review. I would also work on being a little more engaging as this is a main part of the rubric. The slides do a pretty good job of achieving this but the script seems to get a bit overwhelming at times.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the slides, remember that they will be reading or listening, not both. So while I do think you did a good job of keeping words to a minimum, I did point out a few slides that could use less words. The diagrams also seem to get a little overwhelming so I would aim to either cut some out or add a few other visual cues here and there.
Anyway, you're off to a great start so keep it up!!!
Sunskruthi,
ReplyDeleteI think you have done a really good job so far on the script and slides. I have a few comments that will hopefully make your presentation even better. For your script, I think you spend way too long discussing the specific statistics that you used. You bog the audience down in the calculations and scientific technical terms that at times it can be a little hard to see the bigger picture. In order to make sure the audience stays engaged, bring up the broader significance of ADHD patients and curing this disease better throughout the presentation. You sometimes become overly formal, so make sure to write the script how you will actually say it. And finally, make sure to understand how long it will actually take you without the script in front of you, since it will be harder that way.
For the slides, I really like the color scheme and font, so great job on that. The simplistic design really helps your point and emphasizes what you are saying. My suggestion would be to integrate some more pictures on the slides, since there aren;t really many right now. Also some of the pictures are not clear, so please try and fix that. I'm really impressed with your progress so far, so keep up the great work