Art of Speaking Science

According the Ignite Seattle website, “Ignite Seattle is a geek event that combines on-site geekery, sharing, innovation (and drinking).” Oh and admission is free!

What more could you want? <smile>

This week (Hoochy Coochy? No. It’s Pecha Kucha!) in The Public Speaker, I talk what Ignite (and Pecha Kucha) are and also about the pros and cons of these presentation formats. If you haven’t listened to the show, go ahead, it’s only about 7 minutes. In a nutshell, the talks that use this format are quick (5-6 minutes) and concise and usually use great images.

I highly recommend giving this technique a try–even if only to strengthen and build your presentation skills.

In this blog, instead of describing the Ignite format in detail, I wanted to give you an opportunity to see it for yourself. Keep in mind each one is only five minutes long. I hope you’ll invest the time and take a look. I think it’s worth the time.

The first one is called…How the Hell Did Matt Get People to Dance with Him?

It’s a great example of a successful Ignite talk. Notice the simplistic graphics. (Oh, and if you haven’t seen Matt’s videos you need to check them out too.)

The next one I picked because it’s a good example of Ignite, but it’s also content I think you would be interested in. It’s called Hacking the Technical Interview. I liked it because he outlines three main ideas, but he does struggle to keep synchronized (one of the flaws I mentioned in The Public Speaker podcast). I also like it because it’s talking about effective communication <smile>.

This very short clip above gives you an idea of the room set-up and the interactivity. You don’t see any presentations, but it’s still worth looking at.

As you may know I live in the Philadelphia area and wanted to give the knod to someone local. In the next Ignite presentation the content is good. You can see the problem I mentioned about the presenter having difficulty keeping the words coordinated with the images. (Also, notice right at the beginning the networking aspect.)

Ok, so I hope you enjoyed watching these and I hope that you might have picked up an idea or two about making your presentations better.

Maybe I’ve even motivated you to give it a try? I hope so.

Usually in this blog I focus on science specific techniques, but scientists also find themselves in need of making speeches at weddings, at memorial services and also informally when meeting people.  The following podcast is a technique I created to develop a speech in six steps.  It’s really simple to create, easy to deliver, and fun to listen to because the technique is based in storytelling.

Check it out and give it a try.  Let us know what you think!

Lisa B. Marshall’s Six Step Technique to Making a Speech http://preview.tinyurl.com/3nme83

A basic understanding of Adobe Photoshop is definitely a skill needed for the science professional.

Did you know that HP offers a free online course for Adobe Photoshop? The  course has gotten some good feedback, so if you want to learn or brush-up on your skills this is good resource.

The course is designed primarily for Adobe Photoshop CS2. Although Adobe has come up with the latest CS3, the course includes fundamentals of Adobe Photoshop and you could benefit even if you are a CS3 user.

I know many of you would like help with your writing skills. Here are two courses (one free, one fee) and a link free videos and handout from writing workshops.

Fee Online Academic Writing Course:

The first one, is a fee online academic writing course from University of Pennsylvania. I have heard fabulous reviews from people who have gone through this training. Well worth the fee.

Then BPP and Penn’s English Language Program (ELP) have designed the perfect online courses for you. No assigned class times, flexible due dates, and only a 3-5 hour time commitment per week over a 14-week period. The courses are designed for non-native, as well as native English speakers.

Click here for the course descriptions
Click here for registration instructions

Free Online Academic Writing Course:

This free course is designed to help you successfully publish biomedical papers in English. It provides a full outline of the preparation of manuscripts with regards to planning, style, structure and composition.

They also offer a free email newsletter that regularly provides additional tips and advice on every aspect of writing and publishing a biomedical manuscript.

Free Online Video for Postdocs:

The Office of Intramural training at NIH has a great training program and they record the video and usually post the slides and handouts. The quality is excellent. The only downfall, is that you didn’t get to attend the session live! These are worth your time.

Here are three titles:

Workshop: Scientific Writing from the Reader’s Perspective
Workshop: Written Communication Skills
Workshop: CV and Resume Writing: Preparing Effective Job Search Correspondence

I did!

I LOVE this video…especially since my nephew is a particle physicist at Harvard!

If you are a fellow geek you’ve got to view this video that explains particle physics and the new accelerator using rap music…Here’s the video.

Oh, and in case you are wondering what jiggy means….you can learn more here.

Let me know what you think in the comments.

Turns out Charles Darwin took this question very seriously! Who knew?

He was interested in understanding if hair color had effects on mate selection. Here’s an article from UK’s Telegraph describing what was uncovered as a result of the Darwin Correspondence Project which is attempting to compile 15,000 of the letters that Darwin wrote and received during his lifetime.

Oh, and Darwin initially thought perhaps dark hair in the general population was increasing because brunettes were more likely to get married while blondes tended to stay single and childless. Eventually he gave up on the notion and came to the conclusion that the experimental basis was not good enough.

For those that have attended my professional networking seminars you’ve already heard many of my ideas on how to start a conversation and for those that haven’t yet attended I created the list below.

In addition, you can listen to an the very first episode of my new show that I create for Macmillan.

The name of the show is The Public Speaker: Quick and Dirty Tip for Improving Your Communication Skills and the first episode is called “How to Start a Conversation”

(yes, the name was changed from People Skills Pro to The Public Speaker for those that heard me talking about the show). The show is full of ideas and what you see below are some of the highlights.

After a recent seminar, a participant asked me the following…

“Can you tell me what to do if I don’t know how to pronounce someone’s name. For example when I am referring to their work in a presentation and when I meet someone in person?”

I think it might be better to refer this to a manner’s expert, but I’ll give it a shot. Purely from a manners or respect standpoint, I think it is important to always try to learn the proper pronunciation of someone’s name.

My maiden name was “Boehm” and our family pronounced it “Bame” as if it rhymed with “fame” –as you might imagine, very few people ever got that right. I did, however, very much appreciate when someone would ask me how to pronounce it. It was even better if they practiced a few aloud rehearsals in front of me just to check their pronunciation.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to ask someone, “I am not sure how to pronounce your last name, I was wondering if you might help me to say it correctly” or simply “Can you tell me how to properly pronounce your name?” Most people with difficult names recognize that their name is difficult and are happy to help. Let them tell you their name, then you should practice it until they say you’ve got it right. Even if you never get it exactly right, most will appreciate your efforts.

Of course, this process can be done easily when you are standing with the person, face-to-face. So what do you do if you are making a presentation. If that person is going to be in the audience, it is important to ask. In fact, you should ask them to spell it for you phonetically, so that you are sure to get it right, when you are in the front of the room. You can do this via the telephone, via email, or via Twitter, if you want. What if you don’t get a reply?  Simply call and listen to the person’s voice message or perhaps ask his/her assistant.  Again, you are asking out of respect and it is likely the request will be welcome.

What if none of the above techniques worked and you still don’t know? During the presentation, you can simply have the person’s name in text on the bottom of the slide, and reference the work in some other way. This way, you won’t have to pronounce the name at all. Of course, you could always TRY to pronounce it, who knows you may actually get it right.

In the long run, mispronouncing a person’s name just once isn’t a big deal. However, repeatedly mispronouncing a person’s name because you didn’t get the extra step of asking and practicing, is, well, less than polite.  Addressing someone respectfully and properly is expected in all professional settings.

Recently, I received an email from one of my online public speaking workshop participants.

She wrote, “I am interviewing for a position and I am deeply pregnant. Should I somehow mention this just before my job talk? From one point of view, it sounds unprofessional. On the other hand, some people might focus more on the fact that I am pregnant than on my talk. Any advice?”

Here was my reply…
________________________

Hmm… that’s a tough one. I think that if you are obviously pregnant there really is no need to draw additional attention. However, like anything that is a little out of the ordinary, some audience members will be distracted by it.

The “safe” suggestion is to not say anything at all. However, on the other hand, depending on your personality, you may be able to get away with a short quip to lighten the situation. Honestly, I think it depends a lot on your personality. It takes skill to deliver a quip and still appear very professional.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any ready-made quips about pregnancy. I am NOT a humorist, but here are three quips that came to my mind. You are free to use one of them or make up your own. The important thing is that you are comfortable delivering the line.

1) “Thanks for inviting “both” of us here today (and pat your belly and smile when you say the word “both”)

Or (if you are really BIG and close to delivery)

2) Don’t worry, I don’t plan to delivery here in this room–but you better go easy on me– just in case.  (This one might backfire if it is perceived as you being weak, instead of funny.)

Or

3) Haven’t you ever heard…two heads (pat your belly and smile) are better than one?

For me personally, I would be willing to say the third one. I think you would get a small chuckle or at least a smile from your audience and then you could move one.

Let me know what you decide to do.
_______________________________________

What do you think? Should a pregnant woman say something? If so, what? I am very curious to hear what my readers think about this. Tell us in the comments, and don’t forget you can easily video record your comments just by clicking the “add video comment” below.

Today is a MOMENTOUS day in science. I am thrilled because I FINALLY have the answer!

Let me back track a bit, before I tell you the “big news”. You see, about a year or so ago, I started telling my then 3 year old identical twin daughters, “I loved you from here to Pluto and back.” Of course, they asked the natural question, “Mommy, what’s Pluto?”

My first response was, “Well, Pluto is a planet very far away.” Then because I’m a geek, I said, “Well, actually, Pluto not technically a planet anymore.” (These were words I would later regret.)

What do you think they asked?

Of course, “Mommy, If Pluto’s not a planet then what is Pluto?”

For over a year, I didn’t have an answer. And at every opportunity, I would ask a scientist, well, what exactly is Pluto? (I am not sure why it never occurred to me to try to google the answer.) The response was often, well I’m not quite sure. Then one day, someone responded, “Pluto is huge chunk of rock.”

I shared THAT answer with my daughters, but apparently that wasn’t good enough because my daughters CONTINUED to ask the question, almost daily. Yes, daily! They say, “Mommy, if Pluto’s not a planet anymore , what is it?” You have to keep in mind they are identical twins– so the question cames to my ears in loud STEREO –EVERY DAY, for over a year!

So you can imagine my relief today when it was announced that “Plutoid” is the name chosen for solar system objects like Pluto. Guess what GREAT NEWS I will be sharing with my daughters tomorrow?

So, it may not be BIG news for you, but in our household, this is GREAT NEWS!

Recently I delivered a seminar on Scientific Poster Presentation. I made a handout to provide details on what you should include (and exclude) for each section of the poster.

I thought you might find this useful so I decided to post.

If you disagree or have something to add or modify it would be great if contributed via the comments. I will update based on feedback. Oh, here ya go..

Sections to be included in your scientific poster presentation

Title: Used to convey the single overall main message
• Headline title with noun and verb – quantified if possible
• 1-2 lines max using sentence case
• NOT for keyword search – it can be straightforward (or catchy?)
• Max 25 words

Abstract: Do not include an abstract on a poster – unless it is a (dumb) requirement.

Introduction: Get viewer interest about issue or question
• State the purpose/aim/goal (long-term and short-term may be different) using bullets
• Place work in context (where does it fit in overall field)
• Give background minimum
• Might end/start with some bullet statements of your hypotheses
(Hypotheses may be coupled with results in results section)
• Max 125 words

Methods/Materials: (Skip if standard, include if science) Describes experiment
• Use figures, photos, drawings to illustrate experimental design if possible;
• Use flow charts (the type with text, numbers and drawings within boxes) to summarize steps or timing
• Perhaps mention statistical analyses used and how they address hypothesis
• Max 150 words

Results: Summarizes what you found
• Result graphs support only your conclusion bullet points (3-5)
• Each graphs/chart/table provides quantitative and qualitative/descriptive results
• Each graph/chart should contain headline title and/or takeaway conveying understandable main point (may be the only thing read, needs to be clear)
• Negative/positive controls should be labeled and consistent in color (dk grey/ blk suggested)
• Graphs indicate exactly (via arrows, circles, highlights) where to look to see evidence of result
• Do not use legends, instead direct label data elements, remove unneeded grid lines
• Cut down to key words only, remove punctuation
• Bullets OK
• If method/process important can be in smaller under takeaway or bottom of chart
• Max approx 250 words - this should be your largest section

Conclusions: (Conclusions and future directions)
• Should be summary of results in bullet form
• Can include a one or two bullets for future directions (don’t make future directions separate)
• Max 150 words

Literature cited:
• Follow standard format exactly
• Maximum approximately 5 citations

Acknowledgments:
• Mention who has provided funding
• Include disclosures for any type of conflicts
• Possibly include SIGNIFICANT contributors - name and contribution (not title)
• Max 40 words

Further information:
• Your e-mail address and web site address
• Perhaps a URLs - to download PDFs of poster or related papers or your CV
(edit URL – don’t leave blue or underlined)
• Maximum 30 words

This past Thursday the Chronicle of Higher Education reported “Journals Find Fakery in Many Images Submitted to Support Research“.

I was astounded. How could this happen?

In two weeks I’ll be at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center delivering a talk to “young scientists” and I am now wondering if I should add a piece in that says…

“Hey, don’t do this! Why risk your career?”

I was preparing for a networking seminar, so I decided to use my own professional network to prepare for the seminar (tricky, huh?). Anyway, while speaking with Julian Lum, Ph.D. he mentioned two great resources aimed at post-docs and early career scientists. These two books can be downloaded for free (for non-commercial use) from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Here’s the link to both of the books and other great resources.

I highly recommend reading these long BEFORE you start looking for a job in academia and long before you are ready to start you own lab. You’ll need to be doing things NOW in preparation for when you do have your own lab. Read the books to learn more!

Here are links to each of the books:

MAKING THE RIGHT MOVES: A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT FOR POSTDOCS AND NEW FACULTY, SECOND EDITION
Based on courses held in 2002 and 2005 by the Burroughs Wellcome Fund and HHMI, this book is a collection of practical advice and experiences from seasoned biomedical investigators.

TRAINING SCIENTISTS TO MAKE THE RIGHT MOVES
These publications can help universities and professional societies develop programs in scientific management.

If you have found these helpful or you know of other helpful resources let us know in the comments!

“Enthusiasm finds the opportunities, and energy makes the most of them.” — Henry Hoskins

For those that have seen me in person you know that I am BIG on PASSION!! Tonight I was watching NOVA and they had a program on the history of the first flowering plant. There was a scene where the scientists suddenly tells his driver to pull over to the side of the road. The scientists gets out of the car and proceeds to show us several rare flowers that are just growing naturally on the side of the road. At one point, he was so excited and overwhelmed that both my husband and I thought he had hurt himself, but it turned out he was just overwhelmed at seeing a rare orchid. I turned to my husband and said, “I just love to watch a person, like him, who is so excited by their work–it is inspirational.”

Again, I think passion is SO IMPORTANT- for everyone!

Not only do I think that “science rocks” I also think that most scientists are extremely passionate about their work–that’s why I love working with science and technology professionals.

I know that at times, in the lab it feels like you know less this week than last week. It’s these times you have to give yourself a little boost. I found this link a while back but have been saving it. But today I think is the day I am going to share this little gem.

So if your science has got you down…take this very quick break. I promise this will put a smile on your face and perhaps remind you that you are following a dream.

Check it out for you yourself!

(Note: I originally wrote this article in September 2006. For this post, I made a few minor very minor updates. I think since this writing, some conferences are moving in this direction. Comment below about your experiences and thoughts on this.)

One person recently commented to me, “Often times, I look at a poster for 5 minutes and am unsure of the important points, but when I hear just a few minutes from the scientist I find the work so much easier to understand”.

If you read my previous post you already know that I think the landscape for scientific poster presentation is changing. This post will describe more details of my vision, but first you’ll need to allow me a digression.

Up to this point, my writing suggests that poster podcasts are in addition to the poster itself. However, what I didn’t specifically mention is that I believe the form of the actual poster may be changing as well. With the ability to easily create posters electronically, the visual form is likely (and should change) as well.

With a static “linear” printed poster, we present data visually so it can meet the needs of both general and advanced users. However, using a printed, linear format, makes it difficult to meet both groups effectively and often is the reason why posters become overcrowded with text and details. I often hear “We can’t leave that out, because someone might ask”.

As an alternative posters could become purely electronic or “e-posters” if you will. Yes, I know e-posters exist, but right now e-posters are usually just PDFs of the printed poster. But what if we created them in a form that took advantage of web linking, audio and video files? In this linked form, users could collapse or expand the details and navigate through the poster in the manner that works the best for them. What if you could easily project the overall image and simply by touching different sections of the poster it would drill down the next level of detail. This would certainly allow interested parties to first view a more simplified version of the work and allow each viewer to choose to view only the details that are important to them. Now image being able to click to hear the voice of the scientist when you click on the section of interest–that is without the scientist actually being physically there.

Of course, we aren’t quite there with the technology—yet. But we certainly can do more than we currently do.

Today, posters are typically supported by the voice of the creator during the conference (at least for a limited period of time). Like the person in the quote above, I think most would agree that hearing the work in conversational form directly from the scientist would make the work easier to understand.

My vision is that the poster podcast provides the science directly from the scientist in audio/visual form. To be very clear, I am not suggesting that the podcast replace in-person discussions. I view them as a supplement and means to provide the “conversation” when the scientist isn’t available –that is to provide the audio/video in a time-shifted manner so interested parties can hear the the stories behind the science directly from the scientists via the poster podcast. After all, it the story of the scientific process that is so interesting. Poster podcasts make the work more interesting and gives the scientist a way of sharing his passion for the work using his own voice.

As I said in the previous post, for little or no money, it is possible to create a podcast of your work. You could then submit this podcast, along with a PDF of the poster, to the conference organizers for consolidation. Using existing audio search engines, like Alta Vista (remember them?), conference attendees could search the audio files (and of course, the keyword tags associated with the files) along with the text abstracts to determine which posters were of the most interest to them. Because of the detail provided in the audio content, this searchable audio would allow for better, more refined searching. In the current environment, you need to rely on the abstract to include the specific related keywords.

So, once the podcasts are electronically consolidated into a searchable database, the next step is to provide an easy method to listen to this audio. Right now, this type of technology is available (think art museum tours or walking tours in cities). You can visit the art museum and they will give you a portable devise that you simply put the number of painting in and the audio tells you about the painting. You get to go at your own pace, you can pause, go back, and skip ahead. Nice. Why not do this for scientific posters? You can go to the independence area in Philadelphia (and many areas of interest in other cities) and use your i-pod to download MP3 audio walking tours or you can even use your cell phone to listen to the tour.

Again, why don’t we utilize this same types of technology for listening to scientific poster podcasts? This would enable anyone to listen at any time before, during, or after the conference and alleviate conference overload. It would help participants to focus and plan their interactions during the live poster sessions. With the near ubiquity of iPods and other portable MP3 players, the platform is already out there, in our bags, our coat pockets, on our belts.

To be very clear, I am not suggesting that the poster podcasts should replace the human-to-human interaction and discussion. What I am suggesting is that it would help to creator of posters to be able to spend more time with those that would benefit the most from in-person conversation about the work. Nothing can replace human interaction.

I am simply suggesting podcasts (like websites did not so many years ago) will provide yet another avenue of communication about your science. And, it is important to communicate your message through as many routes as possible, after all, the communication of your science to a broad audience should be your goal.

As evidence, a study showed that medical articles reported in The New England Journal of Medicine and then reported in The New York Times receive about 73 percent more citations in medical reports than do articles not reported in The New York Times (cited in Whiteman, Scientists Need Plain Language). Of course, if the work makes it to the New York Times, it probably means the work is significant to begin with.

Speaking of the importance of human interaction, why not use portable technology (you can get a reasonably high quality set-up for less than $100) to capture the interesting conversations you have during the conference itself. Maybe you can even interview someone who’s work is related.

After the conference, or even during the conference, post both the recorded conversations and the previously prepared podcasts to your own blog, the conference blog and any other appropriate location on the web including e-galleries and podcast aggregators like Apple I-Tunes. Again, the last and perhaps most important step in science is communication of the science. You want to be sure that people interested in your very specific topic will be able to find your science this way. Of course, you’ll might need to be careful with what and when you publish to the internet and how decide exactly how public it can be.

I look forward to LISTENING to your next poster presentation. Oh, and if you are inspired by this post and create your poster podcast, be sure to post a link to the podcast. I am hoping some of the work will inspire others to do the same thing.

Note: Again, keep in mind I originally wrote this article in September of 2006. Some progress has been made, but we still have a long way to go.

I want to encourage you to be not only on the leading edge with your science, but also be leading edge with your communication.

How can you do that? By allowing the form to follow function. What do I mean? Read on!

The basic rule for any design is “form follows function.” If an object has to perform a certain function, its design must support that function to the fullest extent possible.

So in terms of poster presentations what exactly is the function of poster presentations? I think most would agree, when you are the creator of the poster, you are most interested in valuable feedback and detailed discussion of the science—you want constructive interaction with others to help you improve the work and take the science to the next level. In short your aims are feedback and professional networking. From the point of view of a poster viewer, you are usually most interested in understanding what others in similar areas (and perhaps not so similar areas) are doing in hopes of shedding new perspectives on your own work.

So this begs the question, is a traditional poster presentation the best means to achieve these goals?

I know many people would say, yes, poster presentation sessions do create the opportunity for interaction. Viewers can not only ask questions but also share ideas and experiences; much more so than oral presentation and therefore posters are wanted and needed in science. In fact, some might argue that for preliminary work, the poster presentation is perhaps the most favorable format.

However, I do not believe that traditional poster sessions, alone, are the best approach, that is not anymore. We are all familiar with the drawbacks of poster sessions, particularly crowded long sessions with hundreds if not thousands of posters. How does one effectively sort through choosing the “right” posters and ensure the presenter is available and keenly alert for conversation when, you, the viewer are ready for that conversation; not to mention the strain of information overload in the conference setting. Wouldn’t it be better to be able to hear directly from the scientists at your convenience? Perhaps before the conference, during the conference, during the poster session, and any time after? Wouldn’t it great to be able to electronically search not only the abstracts (like a few conferences now provide) but also to have the ability to search either on key words or more importantly the actual words delivered by the scientists themselves when describing the posters? Wouldn’t it be great if you could walk up to a poster or view a poster on line and hear the verbal description directly from the researcher, weather or not he was actually physically present or not?

My vision may take some time to unfold in the world of science (I originally wrote this article in September of 2006 - see note below), but I am confidant that “poster presentations” will look and feel a lot different in the very near future and will be better able to meet the goals of both the creator and the viewer.

So what exactly do I have in mind?

Before I share the details, I want to draw attention to the fact that there is revolution going on—a media revolution. In this new era, consumers of content want the ability to easily seek out content and consume it when and how they want it. This combined with the use of time-shifting technology (think TIVO) and the trend of individuals producing content at broadcast quality (think podcasts and vlogs) at little or no cost is having profound effects on everyone, including the world of science.

It’s already happening. Many prestigious scientific journals, including New England Journal of Medicine and Nature have podcasts available for download and blogs for interactive discussion and comment.

Companies (ePosters, Scifor, rnai, etc.) are starting to offer electronic galleries of posters with both public and restricted access. Other scientific professionals are creating “wiki-like” (peer-reviewed in some cases) sites to providing a collaborative environment that maintains the rigor of science but most importantly brings the science to their colleagues “faster” than the traditional routes (See Useful Chemistry - to learn more about open notebook science see the Scholar2Scholar Friday April 18, 2008 post).

Why did I point all that out? Because poster presentations will be influenced by this “revolution” and we will be seeing changes soon.

Exactly how am I envisioning the use of these latest technologies specifically for “poster presentations”?

Let’s start with the initial development and refinement of the poster. Participants in my poster presentation workshop (and my public speaking workshop) use an electronic collaborative blog site for posting content and receiving feedback (both video and text). This provides a unique platform for candid, time-shifted, detailed review. For sure, using this electronic review process clearly facilitates and improves the interaction itself resulting in an improvement in the overall design and content of your poster (or presentation). I would encourage everyone to do the same thing by posting your poster drafts to a private blog and asking for feedback. You could post not only the poster itself in PDF form. An alternative, is to convert the poster image to a .jpg image and post to flickr (or other photo sharing site) and ask for feedback there.

Once you have taken advantage of today’s technology to create a well-designed, visually appealing, effective poster the next step is to develop and practice delivering your key messages. In addition to posting the PDF of the poster itself, you will also want to post audio and/or video recordings of you presenting the work.

You will want to capture and deliver these messages via a “poster podcast” (audio or audio/video downloadable content ). Why? Because a poster podcast provides a low or no cost route of additional communication allowing for time-shifted review, interactivity and searchable content. Besides it simply is easier and more interesting to hear scientific information in interview format (think NPR’s Science Friday or CBS’s Quirks & Quarks).

To get an idea of what I have in mind, listen to the following two podcasts.

The first podcast while interesting for a general audience, may be a bit too simplistic for an advanced scientific audience. Have a listen.

CBS’s Quirks & Quarks

For the second example, I created this podcast with a poster presentation workshop participant! (Thanks Debra!) The workshop helps participants to first develop and then deliver concise, clear, effective messages via “posters”. This is what is typically done in science today, but I wanted to take poster presentation to the natural next level.

So, after the in-person portion of this workshop, I worked one-on-one with a few people. I asked a few basic questions, that, in essence, weaved together their practiced messages into a 3 minute story about the work. I wanted to show, by example, how effective a podcast poster can be and also how easy it is (using low to no cost technology) to create a “poster podcast”.

Debra’s Poster Presentation
(To listen to the podcast, click on the link below then once you are on the page click on one of the streaming links on the left to listen, or download the MP3 from the Other Files section of the page).

Ok, I know, I know…Debra’s portion is pretty good, but my questions were lame; generic and not well thought through. However, rest assured, with more time, more interesting and appropriate questions could be asked. I just wanted to create a quick sample so that you had a better idea of what I was referring to. Notice you can include other files like the PDF of the poster as well as perhaps the full text of the paper and perhaps a copy of your CV. Notice the comments section that could be used to encourage feedback and discussion. Of course, you could embed this on your website and protect with password if necessary until the work can be published publicly.

So how do I envision that these podcasts will be used at an actual conference? Stay tuned…I’ll be writing more about that tomorrow! This is where we’ll put to good use existing technologies that truly will take “poster presentations” to the next level. In addition, I’ll hope to convince you podcasts and my vision will be the standard operating procedure in the very near future and you need to start learning how to become a leading edge communicator using these technologies.

Special Note: I originally wrote this article in September of 2006 and I don’t think scientists were quite ready for my message at the time. However, l am also old enough to remember when I first told scientists that they would one day be using PowerPoint and I was also “poo-pooed” then too! Today, however, I think the younger generation of scientists not only recognize the importance of “on-demand” communication but will demand it. It is time to take these ideas seriously and begin creating your poster podcasts.

To be very clear, I am NOT an expert on grant proposals. However, I get asked the question so often, I thought I provide some links (from the experts) on how to do this right. I hope this helps!

If YOU have a great resource, let us know in the comments! Thanks!

• Inside the NIH Grant Review Process This is a NIH Video cast of the NIH Grant Scientific Peer Review Process (39 minutes)
• What You Need to Know About Electronic R01 Submissions, Alan Kotok (ScienceCareers.org)
  Getting Ready for Electronic R01 Submissions, Alan Kotok (ScienceCareers.org) NIH now requires that applicants submit proposals for its R01 research grants in electronic, rather than paper, form. These 2 articles, parts 1 and 2 of a 2-part series, provide some background, explain the process NIH has devised for submitting electronic R01 applications and the key steps researchers and grant administrators should have taken before the February deadline, and report on how NIH prepared for this process.
• An Evidence-Based Guide to Writing Grant Proposals for Clinical Research. Inouye and Fiellin (Ann Intern Med 2005; 142: 274-282) [PDF document is free] — Describes types and sources of grant funds, provides key recommendations regarding the grant-writing process, and highlights grant

Here’s a great link for all of the “pre-professionals” reading this blog. There are a number of free workshops available for viewing including topics such as:

• Applying to Medical School: Preparing for the MCAT
• Career Counseling Workshop: Planning for Career Satisfaction and Success
• CV and Resume Writing: Preparing Effective Job Search Correspondence
• Getting the Most Out of a Job Fair
• Applying for an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship
• Science Policy: Shaping the Role of Science in Society

There are many more workshops and they often include not only the slides, but also audio and video recordings. Check it out. Some good stuff! If you view one, leave a comment on the quality below.

When I am making presentations about public speaking or delivering a podcast (yes, that really is me in the picture above), I often talk about the perceptions formed based on the rate of speech of the presenter. Inevitably someone in the audience asks me,

“Lisa, how fast do YOU speak?”

If you have attended one of my seminars or spoken with me on the phone you would know that my natural rate of speech is quite fast. When making presentations I speak at approximately 145-160 words per minute (wpm), while an average American English speaker engaged in a friendly conversation speaks at a rate of approximately 110–150 wpm. (Interestingly, publishers recommend books on tape to be voiced at 150-160 wpm, auctioneers are generally 250-400 wpm while the average reading rate is about 200-300 wpm).

However, as you may know, people speak at different rates at different times. Natural speech includes bursts of more rapid speech and in addition, we are all capable of speaking faster and slower when we want. Of course, there are also variations in speed associated with the situation in which the speech is being produced.

We speak more rapidly if we are in a hurry, or saying something urgent, or trying not to be interrupted in a conversation. For many people, nervousness or excitement will also increase the rate of speech. Conversely, we tend to speak more slowly when we are tired or bored. I know for me, I tend to talk more slowly and with more non-words (um, ah, pauses, etc.) when making impromptu presentations and while practicing delivery of new presentation materials. Clearly the emotional state of the speaker greatly influences the rate of speaking.

Finally, I think there is also a cultural and personal element. In some places, like New York City people tend to naturally talk faster, while in other locales people talk much slower. Culturally, if English isn’t the speakers first language, that can also slow down the rate of speech. In addition, some people are naturally fast talkers, while others habitually speak slowly. I was a fast talker even as a child. My mother was constantly telling me to slow down and breathe!

So how do you calculate how your rate of speech?

We are used to measuring the speed at which someone can type, write or take shorthand dictation in terms of how many words per minute are taken down. Some adjustment usually has to be made to penalize someone for going so rapidly that they make mistakes. In measuring speech, we can do the same thing - we can give someone a speaking task such as describing what their research is or what they did on their last vacation - and count how many words they speak in a given time period.

So, are your ready to calculate your speech rate? You have two options. The first option is a more accurate measure of your speech rate, but requires you to speak extemporaneously about a topic for one minute. While the alternative method, isn’t quite as accurate, but does give you a general idea of your speech rate.

Option One: Talk, Tape and Count

Take out your tape recorder. Think of a topic you have a genuine interest in…your family, your research, and your favorite hobby. Once you are ready, begin speaking and begin recording yourself. Be sure to speak for at least one minute on the topic. Then using the rewind function, play the tape back several times to count the number of words you uttered in one minute. It is even better if you extemporaneously present and record one minute of your most recent presentation. This way, your score will be a more accurate measure of your “presentation” speech rate.

Option Two: Read and Count

For those of you that would prefer not to record yourself, here is another way to measure your speech rate. Read the following “test” paragraph aloud. Try to pace yourself as if you are presenting or talking at your “normal” rate. This method isn’t as accurate but it is easier to count.

Start “presenting” the paragraph below. See how far you get after a minute has gone by. Count the number of words you were able to express in one minute. This is your presentation speech rate.

Start your timing, then stop, after one minute.

This begins my test of my presentation speech rate. Using this method, I will measure my speech rate by reading the following sentences as if I am actually speaking in my normal manner.

In our lab, we are determining what is required to turn designed proteins into active enzymes. Specifically, I am working with Bill Smith to add the functions of dinuclear enzymes to our designs. Our work has the potential to create small enzymes capable of replacing large natural ones that are difficult to express and purify.

We found that opening the active site to substrate required using smaller side chains that resulted in destabilization of the protein structure.

(Word count 110)

A detailed analysis suggested that we could stabilize the new enzyme structure by reengineering the turn in our protein.

(Word count 129)

We demonstrated that the new enzyme adopts the desired conformation and can perform several reactions naturally catalyzed by much larger proteins.

(Word count 150)

This work demonstrates that we can design new active sites, and is the first step to the design of active sites capable of novel chemistry.

(Word count 175)

This is a test. This is only a test of my speech rate.

~end~ (Word count 183)
So does your rate of speaking matter?

Yes! It does. Research has shown that speaking rate influences perceptions. In fact, a positive linear relationship has repeatedly been found between speech rate and perceived competence. In fact several studies found that faster rates of speech are associated with perceptions of competence, extraversion, and social attractiveness. In other similar studies, listeners rated competence and social attractiveness higher for those speakers whose perceived and actual speaking rates were similar to their own than to those whose rates they believed to be different from their own.

Obviously, other factors also influence perceptions of competence, extraversion and social attractiveness. What is important to remember is that your rate of speech does have an impact on the perceptions of your audience.

So what is your rate of speech? Let us know in the comments.

I hope you’ll indulge me! I spent all day working on this introduction (when I should have been reviewing contracts and sending out invoices!). As you may know, I am a “one-man-band” (a sole proprietor) which means I never have anyone sitting near my desk (except when I am working at Panera Bread - my “home away from home” office) to ask, “Hey, how does this look? Got any ideas?”

I would be VERY GRATEFUL for YOUR comments, suggestions, improvements.

Really! Both bad and good. I am not creative, or an artist, or videographer or regular vlogger so this was a BIG step for me! I would be delighted to hear what you have to say. Either post your comments here or send me an email if you don’t want them public.

Come on…really, take a minute to give me some feedback! I can take it!

By the way…Expert Presenter is the six week internet delivered workshop that I have been developing. At this point I have all the text created (well, almost all, I keep thinking of new stuff to add, but a year is long enough!) and now I am the process of audio recording the learning modules. I plan to add in a bit more video, similar to what I created today, but with less “fluff” in the beginning.

Right now, the New York Academy of Science in interested in co-branding (and selling) this internet delivered public speaking workshop for life sciences professionals. The idea is provide a low cost alternative to in-person training that still maintains quality AND most importantly, allows professionals to take the training at the bench via their computer or IPod (or any MP3 player). We plan to offer an option for in-person group coaching for graduates in different cities across the world.

Again, if you have thoughts or ideas on this, I’m all ears. I really hope you’ll take a minute to write.

This past fall the University of Pennsylvania hosted a symposium for biomedical postdocs and they wanted me to provide feedback for a few of the presenters. I wasn’t able to attend, so I asked them to record and upload the video using www.viddler.com. This is a tool I started using about six months ago and I LOVE it.

This tool allows me to provide audio and video comments (think YouTube) but here’s the twist (and best part)…I can insert the comments into SPECIFIC points within the talk. So I can “interrupt” the talk with my comments! How cool is that? Oh, and others can add their comments too or reply to comments that have already been left. Check it out…

So how can YOU use this tool? Watching yourself on video is one of the best ways to improve your presentations. With the prevalence of webcams today and cheap video cameras there is no reason NOT to record yourself. Oh, and don’t wait until you’ve finished all of your slides. When you get a section done, go ahead and practice delivering just that section. Do one or two rehearsals, then go ahead and press record. (If you have a webcam on your computer, all you need to do is go to the Viddler website, go to the record tab and choose the big red record button). It really is quick and painless (and no I don’t get a commission from them).

Once you have reviewed your own video three times (one time for organization, one time for delivery and one time to just to get used to looking at your mug and listening to your voice <smile>) then be brave and send the video to a few friends and colleagues and ask them for feedback.

You need to be specific, tell them, ” Please give me two or three things that worked well, and two or three things that I could improve on”. It is important to specifically invite suggestions for improvement otherwise you are likely to get “Oh, yeah, your talk looked fine. Good job.”

Better, yet, use your extended network (see my post about LinkedIn) to find someone that doesn’t know you very well but is in a related area and then ask them to be your “video presentation partner”. (When they ask you what the heck that is…just send them here to this blog post! …clever marketing for me, huh? <smile>) The point is that your sisters, brothers, and friends are less likely to tell the honest truth, whereas someone who committed to improving their communication skills will likely give your great feedback because they understand just how important it is.

Anyway, the idea is to use Viddler’s social networking (the “friend” function or better yet, use a buddy list) to send your short clips out for review. Think of like the process you follow when you send a paper out for review. You do it then, why not for presentations?

By creating videos you won’t be nervous (you are only performing for the camera) and your “friends” will be able to review when they have time. Oh and one last thing, if you want REALLY HONEST feedback, you could use the account I set up so that folks can provide ANONYMOUS feedback. (Contact me and I’ll tell you the login and password for the account. ) This way you’ll never know which friend to thank (or be mad at!) Oh, and of course, you could always ask me to review as well.

Here’s an example below. Take a look. And be sure to insert a comment, especially if you have an idea to improve the presentation, but even just to insert a test comment to try out the technology.

P.S. Oh, and I am looking for a few more video volunteers to post on this blog. So if you want the opportunity to get some free help from me, send me a link to your video that you have uploaded to Viddler. (And I promise to provide positive as well as constructive comments.)

Check it out!! I inserted a video comment right at the start so you could see how it works. The rest are text comments. Let us know what you think in the comments.

A few weeks ago, I was “on the fence” about going to a Jeff Pulver social media networking breakfast. The main reason I was even considering this event was to meet a particular person who had RSVP’d a confirmation. I was thinking, “Hmmmm…but what if he decides not to go–will it really be worth my time?”

Then my brother emailed me to let me know he had been laid off from his job (after 13 years of employment with the same company) and was wondering if I could help with his job search. I immediate thought about the networking event and told him it might be a good idea to attend the event–even if just to brush-up on his networking skills. So I directed him to the Facebook event page detailing the event and told him to review the profiles of the people who had confirmed attendance.

On the day of the event I met my brother at the train station. On our ride in I asked my brother, “Hey Ron, did you have a chance to review the profiles and set your goals?” He told me he didn’t have a chance to review and then said, “I need goals?”

I responded “Here’s the thing, if you don’t have goals for attending an event, how will you know if was worthwhile?” I then went on to say, if it’s possible, it’s always a good idea to plan who you want to meet and want you want to accomplish BEFORE the event.

Why are goals important? First, if you can’t come up with at least 2 or 3 specific, obtainable objectives, then attending the event is probably not worth your time. Second, goals helps you to focus your time (and choices) while you are at the event. Finally, when the event is over, you can measure your level of success which can then help you decide if you should do it (or something like it ) again.

However, I’ll admit you also need to consider  the “you don’t know, what you don’t know” factor. For example, the two things biggest benefits I gained from attending that event were things I couldn’t have anticipated ahead of time.

Unexpectedly I met a fiction writer, Christine Cavalier (aka Purplecar) so I mentioned to her a new “writing” project I am developing with a major NY publisher. She made a suggestion that was incredibly insightful. I knew immediately that her idea was going to make a significant positive impact on the project. I was even somewhat embarrassed that I hadn’t come up with idea. Of course, I thanked her over and over again! (Thanks, Christine - again!)

The second biggest benefit was learning about a possible source of seed money for a community service project that I have been thinking about. I have a great idea that with a small amount of money could really make a major impact on the lives of people in my local community. In fact, I would like to ask for YOUR help. How can you help? Well, the more votes I get for the project, the more likely it is that I will get the funding. Once I find a few moments to post my idea, I’ll post a link here so you can cast your vote for me! (That is, if you agree that it is a fabulous idea!)

Finally, my goal of meeting Kevin, never panned out. (Kevin Werbach, if you are reading this, I will be at University of Pennsylvania delivering seminars in both April and May and I would like to meet you.) So although I met my goal of helping my brother brush-up on his networking skills and I gained two pearls of wisdom, I did not achieve all of my up-front goals.

Was the event worth my time? For me, family always come first and if I was able to help my brother in some small way, then for sure it was worth my time. (In fact, he just called to update me on his job search. Sounds like he will be gainfully employed very soon!) In addition, the idea from Christine, for sure, was worth the time investment and my guess is that I’ll get a chance to meet Kevin soon.

So, my question for you is…what goals will you set for your next event? How will you know if you have been successful? Tell us about it in the comments.
.

If you don’t already think I’m a geek…then this post will surely convince you of that.

Today, I was listening to NPR’s Studio 360. The host, Kurt Andersen, was doing a segment with Gary Hustwit, the director of the recently released documentary “Helvetica.” (It’s a feature-length film about typography, graphic design and global visual culture.)

At the end the segment, Kurt asks, “Do you have any strong feelings about fonts? How much do you hate Comic Sans?” (Ok, here’s the geeky part, ready?) I actually responded by looking in the general direction of my stereo speakers, rolling my eyes up (as if the host could actually see and hear me) and I said aloud, “Don’t get me started!”

Just last week I had been invited to the School of Medicine at Harvard University to work with postdoctoral researchers. One of the PowerPoint presentations that I reviewed used Comic Sans. I politely explained that this font was originally created for cartoon text and in general, communicates silliness and fun.

I suggested instead that she pick a more neutral, professional font - like Helvetica - to communicate her very serious scientific work. It’s simple, well-proportioned, and modern (even though this year marks the fiftieth anniversary of this typeface). For PC users, I should mention that Arial, is Microsoft’s version of Helvetica (although there are differences).

It’s not that I dislike Comic Sans, or think that it should be banned, it’s just that I believe that the characteristics of a font convey tone or meaning (like the tone of your voice) and I think for presentations (or any visual display of information) it is important that the tone match the content.

If you are communicating serious, significant, scientific findings, then a serious, neutral font should be chosen so that the content itself is concentrated on (not the feeling communicated by the font). If someone asks you about the font you are using and not about the science, something has gone wrong!

What I don’t understand is the increased use of this silly font among scientists. With each passing month I see more and more presentations using the font. I don’t get it? What is the attraction? Is it just the novelty? Can’t they see how this how this font can create a negative impression and impact their credibility? (Comic Sans users, I invite you to comment below because I really don’t get understand this increasing trend.)

So, do I think there is ANY use for Comic Sans? Sure, it can be used, but sparingly and thoughtfully. When communicating in a casual manner or in an effort to communicate fun and frivolity then I say- go for it! (In fact, I admit I have used it when communicating with young students in online forums.)

Here’s the bottom line for you, my clients and regular blog readers:

You are a very smart person who is communicating very important, complex ideas, please, don’t EVER use Comic Sans for work. If you do, it will just make you appear unprofessional or worse, not serious about your work.

Yep, Kurt, I guess I do have a strong opinion about a font, I suppose I just didn’t realize it until you asked!

This past week I delivered two seminars for the School of Medicine at Harvard University. At the end of my first seminar something surprising happened.

As you might expect, after seminars, participants often come up to ask questions they didn’t want to ask in front of the entire group. Of course, I answer what I can and if I have supplemental materials that pertains to the question, I usually offer to send the person more information. I always ask for the person’s business card so that I can follow-up with the requested information.

Well, this typical scenario played out again at Harvard, except, this time, each time I asked for a card, the response was “I don’t have a business card.” (It wasn’t just that they didn’t have the cards WITH them–they DIDN’T HAVE business cards at all! Well, to be fair, one guy did have a card, but he was the exception.)

I thought to myself…”What??? No business cards???” The audience was made up of postdoctoral researchers, who by definition, either are currently looking for a job or very soon will be seeking a new position. Hadn’t someone explained the need for business cards?

So, why do I think postdocs (for that matter - anyone trying to advance their career) should absolutely have a business card? Because to most, the very presence of a business card means that a person is serious about their career and they recognize the value of looking professional in all interactions. Besides cards are so cheap (you can get 100 full-color cards for approximately US$15) there is no reason NOT to have them.

So what does a scientific researcher do with business cards?

First and foremost, a card should be exchanged anytime there is an exchange of ideas, a possible collaboration. Certainly, you should be handing them out during poster presentations, after conference talks, during professional meetings with people outside of your lab. You should even consider giving a stack of cards to you mentor/collaborators so that they can network on your behalf. Of course, business cards can also be used to conveniently leave a note or to easily provide your contact info–you’re never stuck looking around for a pen and paper. (For a more unusual use of your business card, read about speed-networking for science geeks).

Those early in their career can also use business cards to make important contacts. When you hand someone a business card, “card courtesy”, dictates that they give you one in return. For senior people, it’s almost a reflex. You can take advantage of this by giving your card to senior research professionals (you won’t have to “work up the nerve” to approach them for their contact information). Simply hand them your card at an appropriate moment.

So what exactly should your card look like?

First and foremost, it should be simple and professional. (For inspiration, take a look at the professional layouts chosen by the postdocs at University of Pennsylvania or perhaps you prefer a more unusual approach). It should be on standard weight card stock and should include the full color logo of your institution. Of course, you’ll want to include your full contact information.

If you have a famous boss, be sure to include “Famous Name Laboratory” in the address of the institution. You’ll also want to include your cell phone and permanent email (institutional email accounts are fleeting) address so that someone can connect with you during personal time or even a few years later.

Finally, you’re card should have a link to your professional blog/website (If you don’t have one, these are free and easy to set-up and are also a job search networking essential) that includes links to your work, your updated CV, and your professional frequently asked questions document.

Every time you meet someone you should be networking. Even when you meet someone at the local coffee house or a wedding, it’s good practice to explain your work and then exchange business cards. It is NEVER to early to start building your professional network –in fact, it’s best to develop it BEFORE you need it. With this in mind, if you don’t have a card, you should get one now!

You should keep some in your wallet/purse, in your glovebox, in your laptop case, in your desk at work, in your desk at home…everywhere, really. You never want to be caught without your card. You never know when you might meet someone that can help you. A professional card can speak volumes abo