Some good ideas, but way too conservative. All the references will not be legible to anyone beyond row 2, so they only take up slide real estate. Likewise, simply adding annotations to various subfigures is useless as long as said subfigures are still there to distract the attention away from what is being talked about. Also, figure design from publications should only be used when presenting someone else's research - if it's your own, make new diagrams better suited for presentations. Print and presentation are different media governed by different usability standards. You can magnify, turn and take your time with a PDF, with a presentation, the presenter dictates the sign, the orientation and how much time you have to assess a slide. Make it readable, make it easily accessible and limit the amount of information added at any one time. Unless a comparison is necessary, split subfigures onto individual slides.
While there are a number of useful suggestions, the powerpoint slides shown do conform to most recommendations for good slides. The main failings are having too many words on the slides, and having too small a type font.
Slides are not meant to be a read-along. Small font is a useful way to note that information is a reference if needed. A scientific audience will recognize that the the blurbs to the left are the study conditions and can trust the data. Prominent signal cues indicate the data trend, and the presenter describes it. Without reference material, the data could be misrepresented, and for scientific data, some conditions cannot be separated for the data. This presentation still allows the audience to focus on the message during the presentation, yet know that details are referenceable when later referring to the presentation.
The principles are good and make a lot of sense however, the slides themselves are quite bland. I understand that in science it is substance over beauty but I think giving this slideshow to a theater of med students would send them to sleep. If you look at other presentations where visual aids and animation are the main focus (along with a set theme), are perhaps more effective.
+ben simpson and all, Good points here. I've been doing a bit of thinking about how presentations in the sciences might be different than those in history, mathematics, and so on. Any thoughts? I like the ideas here, but I wonder if the large chunks of text on the slide detract from what the presenter is saying? If not, I'm wondering how they work together. Thanks for sharing your ideas!
![3 Ways to Create PowerPoint Presentations with ChatGPT [for Teachers]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/JmVWz2PFVA0/mqdefault.jpg)
I can't believe we are getting this super important tutorial just for free. Thanks!
POV: you're making a powerpoint for a science project
This course should be mandatory for University professors.
😁😁😁
one of the best tutorial on presentation.
Many Thanks
Remarkable work. Thanks much.
"Do not use bulletpoints" said in bullet point form
There's a difference between the way his form and putting 10 different ways
Slow👏 clap👏... Thank you Sir🤝
Excellent tutorial on the scientific PPT presentation!
This is extremely helpful, thank you sir.
How do you insert the arrow for word tables?
Great job
Maju terus
Great advice, agree with it all but the bulletpoints...
I need slides for Microsoft word for my biography assignment in a presentation form dew today. .
Good job!
Very helpful.
Some good ideas, but way too conservative. All the references will not be legible to anyone beyond row 2, so they only take up slide real estate. Likewise, simply adding annotations to various subfigures is useless as long as said subfigures are still there to distract the attention away from what is being talked about. Also, figure design from publications should only be used when presenting someone else's research - if it's your own, make new diagrams better suited for presentations. Print and presentation are different media governed by different usability standards. You can magnify, turn and take your time with a PDF, with a presentation, the presenter dictates the sign, the orientation and how much time you have to assess a slide. Make it readable, make it easily accessible and limit the amount of information added at any one time. Unless a comparison is necessary, split subfigures onto individual slides.
While there are a number of useful suggestions, the powerpoint slides shown do conform to most recommendations for good slides. The main failings are having too many words on the slides, and having too small a type font.
Slides are not meant to be a read-along. Small font is a useful way to note that information is a reference if needed. A scientific audience will recognize that the the blurbs to the left are the study conditions and can trust the data. Prominent signal cues indicate the data trend, and the presenter describes it. Without reference material, the data could be misrepresented, and for scientific data, some conditions cannot be separated for the data. This presentation still allows the audience to focus on the message during the presentation, yet know that details are referenceable when later referring to the presentation.
Solved everything! (for oral presentations)
Watching this for Research methods. Where my fellow classmates at?!
The principles are good and make a lot of sense however, the slides themselves are quite bland. I understand that in science it is substance over beauty but I think giving this slideshow to a theater of med students would send them to sleep. If you look at other presentations where visual aids and animation are the main focus (along with a set theme), are perhaps more effective.
+ben simpson and all, Good points here. I've been doing a bit of thinking about how presentations in the sciences might be different than those in history, mathematics, and so on. Any thoughts? I like the ideas here, but I wonder if the large chunks of text on the slide detract from what the presenter is saying? If not, I'm wondering how they work together. Thanks for sharing your ideas!
Very helpful.