Guidelines for Moderators, Discussants and Presenters. Guidelines for Presenters, Moderators and Discussants (competitive paper sessions)

Similar documents
Planning a Webcast. Steps You Need to Master When

PUBLIC SPEAKING: Some Thoughts

Writing Research Articles

Welcome to the Purdue OWL. Where do I begin? General Strategies. Personalizing Proofreading

HISTORY COURSE WORK GUIDE 1. LECTURES, TUTORIALS AND ASSESSMENT 2. GRADES/MARKS SCHEDULE

APA Basics. APA Formatting. Title Page. APA Sections. Title Page. Title Page

CEFR Overall Illustrative English Proficiency Scales

Introduction to Communication Essentials

Teachers Guide Chair Study

RESOLVING CONFLICT. The Leadership Excellence Series WHERE LEADERS ARE MADE

Statistical Analysis of Climate Change, Renewable Energies, and Sustainability An Independent Investigation for Introduction to Statistics

Presentation Instructions for Presenters at the 2017 AAFS Annual Scientific Meeting

Module 9: Performing HIV Rapid Tests (Demo and Practice)

What is Teaching? JOHN A. LOTT Professor Emeritus in Pathology College of Medicine

Mapping the Assets of Your Community:

Getting Started with Deliberate Practice

Introduction and Motivation

PREVIEW LEADER S GUIDE IT S ABOUT RESPECT CONTENTS. Recognizing Harassment in a Diverse Workplace

The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages p. 58 to p. 82

Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATs; Angelo & Cross, 1993)

What to Do When Conflict Happens

TRAITS OF GOOD WRITING

CHEM 6487: Problem Seminar in Inorganic Chemistry Spring 2010

MBA 5652, Research Methods Course Syllabus. Course Description. Course Material(s) Course Learning Outcomes. Credits.

visual aid ease of creating

Lecturing Module

TU-E2090 Research Assignment in Operations Management and Services

CPS122 Lecture: Identifying Responsibilities; CRC Cards. 1. To show how to use CRC cards to identify objects and find responsibilities

Guidelines for Writing an Internship Report

Study Group Handbook

Rubric for Scoring English 1 Unit 1, Rhetorical Analysis

Graduate Program in Education

Getting a Sound Bite Across. Heather Long, MD ACMT Annual Scientific Meeting Clearwater, FL March 28, 2015

CPS122 Lecture: Identifying Responsibilities; CRC Cards. 1. To show how to use CRC cards to identify objects and find responsibilities

RUBRICS FOR M.TECH PROJECT EVALUATION Rubrics Review. Review # Agenda Assessment Review Assessment Weightage Over all Weightage Review 1

Unit Lesson Plan: Native Americans 4th grade (SS and ELA)

Topic 3: Roman Religion

E C C. American Heart Association. Basic Life Support Instructor Course. Updated Written Exams. February 2016

On May 3, 2013 at 9:30 a.m., Miss Dixon and I co-taught a ballet lesson to twenty

How to Judge the Quality of an Objective Classroom Test

Twenty-One Suggestions for Writing Good Scientific Papers. Michal Delong and Ken Lertzman. 1. Know your audience and write for that specific audience.

USC VITERBI SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING

Conducting an interview

How to make successful presentations in English Part 2

The Writing Process. The Academic Support Centre // September 2015

Lab Reports for Biology

Lecturing in the Preclinical Curriculum A GUIDE FOR FACULTY LECTURERS

PREP S SPEAKER LISTENER TECHNIQUE COACHING MANUAL

MENTORING. Tips, Techniques, and Best Practices

EDIT 576 DL1 (2 credits) Mobile Learning and Applications Fall Semester 2014 August 25 October 12, 2014 Fully Online Course

Predatory Reading, & Some Related Hints on Writing. I. Suggestions for Reading

HIGH SCHOOL SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS ATTITUDES ABOUT INCLUSION. By LaRue A. Pierce. A Research Paper

COMMUNICATING EFFECTIVELY WITH YOUR INSTRUCTOR

DEVM F105 Intermediate Algebra DEVM F105 UY2*2779*

The Teenage Brain and Making Responsible Decisions About Sex

Stimulating Techniques in Micro Teaching. Puan Ng Swee Teng Ketua Program Kursus Lanjutan U48 Kolej Sains Kesihatan Bersekutu, SAS, Ulu Kinta

CARITAS PROJECT GRADING RUBRIC

SMALL GROUPS AND WORK STATIONS By Debbie Hunsaker 1

Unit 3. Design Activity. Overview. Purpose. Profile

LEADERSHIP AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS

Proposal for an annual meeting format (quality and structure)

Writing an Effective Research Proposal

File # for photo

EDIT 576 (2 credits) Mobile Learning and Applications Fall Semester 2015 August 31 October 18, 2015 Fully Online Course

Mini Lesson Ideas for Expository Writing

IBM Software Group. Mastering Requirements Management with Use Cases Module 6: Define the System

Brainstorming Tools Literature Review and Introduction to Code Development

Achievement Level Descriptors for American Literature and Composition

Arizona s English Language Arts Standards th Grade ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION HIGH ACADEMIC STANDARDS FOR STUDENTS

Activities, Exercises, Assignments Copyright 2009 Cem Kaner 1

Job Hunting Skills: Interview Process

DESIGNPRINCIPLES RUBRIC 3.0

Speak with Confidence The Art of Developing Presentations & Impromptu Speaking

Plans for Pupil Premium Spending

STRATEGIC LEADERSHIP PROCESSES

Presentation skills. Bojan Jovanoski, project assistant. University Skopje Business Start-up Centre

Chapter 5: TEST THE PAPER PROTOTYPE

MANAGERIAL LEADERSHIP

BENGKEL 21ST CENTURY LEARNING DESIGN PERINGKAT DAERAH KUNAK, 2016

Leader s Guide: Dream Big and Plan for Success

Poster Presentation Best Practices. Kuba Glazek, Ph.D. Methodology Expert National Center for Academic and Dissertation Excellence Los Angeles

West s Paralegal Today The Legal Team at Work Third Edition

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Graduate Social Work Program Course Outline Spring 2014

ENG 111 Achievement Requirements Fall Semester 2007 MWF 10:30-11: OLSC

Further Oral Activity reflection form: Language & Literature

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL DISSERTATION PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT FELLOWSHIP SPRING 2008 WORKSHOP AGENDA

BSM 2801, Sport Marketing Course Syllabus. Course Description. Course Textbook. Course Learning Outcomes. Credits.

Houghton Mifflin Online Assessment System Walkthrough Guide

Use the Syllabus to tick off the things you know, and highlight the areas you are less clear on. Use BBC Bitesize Lessons, revision activities and

To write an effective response paper, you must do the following well:

THE REFLECTIVE SUPERVISION TOOLKIT

Table of Contents. Internship Requirements 3 4. Internship Checklist 5. Description of Proposed Internship Request Form 6. Student Agreement Form 7

OPTIMIZATINON OF TRAINING SETS FOR HEBBIAN-LEARNING- BASED CLASSIFIERS

Academic Success at Ohio State. Caroline Omolesky Program Officer for Sponsored Programs and Academic Liaison Office of International Affairs

writing good objectives lesson plans writing plan objective. lesson. writings good. plan plan good lesson writing writing. plan plan objective

Why Pay Attention to Race?

Chapter 4 - Fractions

Linking the Common European Framework of Reference and the Michigan English Language Assessment Battery Technical Report

This curriculum is brought to you by the National Officer Team.

Conducting an Interview

Transcription:

Revised on September 2, 2018 Guidelines for Moderators, Discussants and Presenters Guidelines for Presenters, Moderators and Discussants (competitive paper sessions) The APMAA conference consists of plenary sessions, panel sessions, parallel sessions and company and cultural visits. APMAA parallel sessions comprise two types of sessions: competitive paper sessions and development paper sessions. For competitive paper sessions, presentations are organized into topic areas. Papers in this session are presented sequentially in 30-minute presentation blocks (15 min. presentation, 10 min. discussion, 5 min. Q&A). Each presenter's final written paper is available in the conference USB proceedings to participants. All presentation session rooms have PC, screens and data projectors. Overhead projectors for transparencies are not provided in the rooms. Competitive Paper Sessions Each session is either 90 min. (3 presenters, 1 moderator and 3 discussants), or 60 min. (2 presenters, 1 moderator and 2 discussants). Each presenter is allocated 15 min. for presentation. (About 10-15 slides). The moderator coordinates the session. If a discussant does not show up, the moderator must discuss papers instead. Therefore, he/she should prepare discussion slides for all three papers. Each discussant is allocated 10 min.for discussion. (About 7-10 slides). Here we provide guidelines for presenters, moderators and discussants that are beneficial to all, including audiences. 1. PRESENTER GUIDELINES (Time allocation: 15 minutes) Preparation: During your 15-minute paper presentation, be sure to state the structure and main points of your argument explicitly and clearly at the outset and again in the summary. Your slides should contain only what is necessary to help the audience follow the key points of the paper. Rehearse your presentation out loud several times, if possible in front of a listener who can give you feedback on both form and content.

Native speakers of English need to avoid speaking too fast or colloquially; nonnative speakers should enunciate clearly so that any foreign accent does not impair comprehension. Spend most of the time on results, discussion, and conclusions Concisely describe your method Go very lightly on the literature PPT presentation: Be a guide to the audience rather than piling on facts. Do not overwhelm people with a lot of tables that take time to interpret. DON T put material on a slide that only the people in the front rows can read. Font sizes smaller than 28pt will likely be unreadable. DON T use full sentences on your slides or write out your entire talk on your slides. Time management: Make sure your talk fits into the allotted 15 minutes of your presentation. DO stop at the end of the allotted time, even if you have content left. No matter how hard you worked on your last few slides, the audience would rather have time for discussion. The session moderator in the room will have to cut your talk short, should it run over, to ensure all presenters in the session are allotted their full presentation time. The conference needs to keep on schedule. Arrive early and make yourself known to your discussant and session moderator. 2. MODERATOR GUIDELINES Role: Session moderators introduce the speakers, keep time for the presentations, and facilitate the discussion. Describe the process followed in the session. Tell people how many papers will be presented, how much time each presentation will be and also at what point questions will be possible. Keep your comments to a minimum other than introducing presenters. You should go last if you are presenting your own paper during the session you are moderating, even if you need to change the order from the program. If a discussant does not show up, the moderator must discuss papers instead. Time management: Make sure there is time for reasonable presentation and discussion and to finish on time. Bring along time cards large enough that the presenter can see. Have a 5- minute card and a time-is-up card. Even if it is a bit uncomfortable be firm with presenters who continue past the allowed time. Begin on time. Start with a welcome message to the audiences, including a clear statement of the session title. Therefore, you should prepare discussion slides for all three papers.

2. DISCUSSANT GUIDELINES (Time allocation: 10 minutes) Role: If you are well-prepared, it will greatly enhance the paper session, so please spend the time needed for careful analysis. Please prepare PPT slides for your comments. Mention both the strengths of a paper and areas for improvement. It is difficult to make points that are both useful for the authors as well as being interesting to the audience. Avoid insider discussions that probe small details of a paper. Time management: These are best given to the author in written notes or outside discussion over tea. You have 10 (5) minutes for discussion. Finish on time! The following material is a good guide. There are other guides that may also be of help if you search for them on the internet. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Tips on Being a Good Discussant \\\\\\\\\\\ (Excerpt from the Economic Scholars Program https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/educate/events/esp/tipsdiscussant.pdf) Developing the skills of a good discussant pays off in several ways. It is something that you are often asked to do. The same skills that you develop to be a good discussant will also be used in your future responsibility as a journal referee. Learning how to read other papers with the critical eye of a good discussant will help you improve your own writing. As a discussant, you have two main responsibilities. 1. Help those in the audience better understand the paper. You have read the paper very carefully and have taken the time to understand the paper s contributions, its strengths and weaknesses and its most salient points that need to be conveyed to the audience. 2. Help the author. What s your reaction to the paper and why? What can the author do to improve the paper? There are various strategies to follow in forming your discussion. Here are some tips. Stay on time. There is a time limit on your portion of the presentation. This time limit is firm. Prepare your remarks in advance, practice them and be concise. Briefly summarize the paper s main message and its contribution. The presenter must spend a good deal of time developing the ideas in the paper, carefully presenting the steps in the argument and reporting the main findings. Sometimes, the audience gets lost in the detail. On one slide, summarize the paper s main contribution, which will capture the essence of the paper for the audience. If the presenter gives a good summary, you can abbreviate this step of the discussion, but remember that a summary is almost always welcomed. If the presenter was confusing, then your summary is often the best way for the audience to follow the paper s contribution, and you may need to spend a bit more time on summarizing the paper.

Describe how the paper fits into the literature. Usually, this is clear from your summary of the paper s main message and its contribution and does not require any further elaboration. However, sometimes there are important references that the paper does not mention or entire literatures are ignored. In other circumstances, you may wish to point out that the paper s message is applicable beyond the narrow focus described in the paper. Evaluate if the paper makes its case. Almost every paper in its introduction claims its contribution. Are the claims convincing? Are there problems with specific parts of the argument? For example, It succeeds in making points 1 5 but not 6 8. If problems exist, identify them. Is it a mistake in economics, mathematics, data analysis or interpretation? Describe any unique aspects of the paper. Is there a particularly useful and interesting approach in the paper? If the paper introduces you to a new technique or interesting data set and you think that it will be useful in other applications, and then share it with the audience. Simplify the paper s technical contribution if unduly difficult to understand. Sometimes a paper s results are hard to understand. There may be a lot of technical detail that obscures the intuition behind a result. Something may seem counterintuitive at first, but not, if you look at it in a different way. You may be able to make the main points in a way that highlights clearly what s going on in the paper. This is very hard to pull off but can be a great help to the audience. It s good training for you to think about just what you need and do not need to convey the paper s findings. Make suggestions on how to improve the paper. Do you think the paper could be strengthened by changing it in some direction? Are there obvious directions for future research? Try to be specific. It s not helpful to make very general or vague recommendations, so be clear and concise. Focus on the big picture. Do not get bogged down in details. A typical discussion lasts ten minutes, which allows you time for four to five slides. Decide what needs to be said and focus on making your points to the audience and author on those slides. Try to distil your discussion to one or two important points and use most of your time in discussing them. After the seminar is usually the best time to go over the small but useful comments and corrections, including spelling errors, incorrect citations, etc. Don t waste your discussion time going over minutiae unless the paper includes no substantive points and is poorly written. Be constructive. Authors need feedback on their work. Was something missed? Is something obviously wrong? Is the work interesting? And, most importantly, how can the paper be improved? Again, many small suggestions are best handled in a private conversation between you and the author after the seminar, but if one or two are particularly clever, then you can share them with the audience. Above all, try to avoid making unhelpful criticism. Substantiate your criticism.

Do not apologize for being a poor choice to discuss the paper. Over time, we all get asked to discuss papers that are not in our immediate area of expertise. Just do the best you can without apologizing. If the paper was delivered to you very late, or if the paper presented has undergone major changes from the draft the author sent you, then the presenter should apologize to you and the audience and should let everyone know that you were not given the tools to properly do your job. If the presenter does not offer you this courtesy, then you may explain. For example, I haven t seen this draft of the paper, so some of my comments may no longer be relevant. Get down to business. In preparation of your discussant role, you may find helpful the following suggestions: Make a list initially of all of the paper s sections, tables, figures, etc., and the approximate number of pages devoted to each. Read the paper once just to form an initial impression of what each section does and how they fit together. Make a list of things that you particularly notice or questions you have. Read the paper again making a new list in response to your first list. (Some questions may go away upon the second reading.) Work through each equation and table, making sure that you can either reproduce the math or verify the calculations and, most importantly, you understand the result. Jot down ideas for a potential extension or anything else that seems unusual or interesting. Read a few of the background papers from the references to get a better idea of how the paper fits into the literature. Review all your notes and develop a discussion outline. Set the paper aside if time permits. Prepare your remarks after reading the paper once again. Make sure you have concisely summarized the paper and your remarks are relevant and helpful. If you are not sure, read the paper and citations again until you are confident. Prepare your slides with only the most important details/equations/results/etc. Be happy with a preparation well done. What you should do during the presentation. Pay careful attention to the paper s presenter and try to adjust your comments to create a natural flow from presentation to discussion. This will require modification on your part. Do what you feel comfortable with. For example, if the presenter makes a point particularly well, you will probably not want to spend much time on it. On the other hand, if an important idea was not well presented and you feel confident in addressing it, by all means do so.