Presenting at a conference, either orally or via poster, can be a daunting prospect. This is often doubly so for students with fewer conferences under their belts, although I assure you that the fear never fades entirely! Having (relatively) recently joined the ranks of the postdocs and presented my first post-PhD work at a conference (the British Ecological Society 2023 meeting), I was offered the opportunity to act as a judge for some of the entrants to the student poster and oral presentation prizes. Therefore, I can share with you a glimpse of my experience from the ‘other side’ of conferencing, and some more general tips to get the most out of the experience.
The first thing to note on the prize judging side, is that the competition was immense in both categories. BES is a huge conference, with 11 concurrent oral presentation sessions over three days, and two poster sessions of approximately 200 posters each night. Not to mention the hundreds of additional online talks and posters that were submitted as part of the now (post-covid) hybrid conference – and this is the case across most conferences these days. I highlight this to demonstrate that even if your poster is faultless, the best one you’ve ever made, there may be many other equally excellent posters that keep you from the top spot. But don’t be discouraged! Missing out on the prize doesn’t mean that you efforts have gone to waste. Striving to produce the perfect poster or presentation means that you are communicating your research more clearly and honing the skills that you will use for the rest of your careers – either within or outside of academia.
So, how is the judging carried out, and what are judges like me looking for? Let’s start with oral presentations. Firstly, if you’re interested in being a judge rest assured that the organisers are happy to assign you talks that work around your own presenting/attending schedule. I was able to choose times I wasn’t available, then supplied with a list of presentations to observe, and a sort of marking scheme by which to judge them. Oral presentations were judged out of ten in four criteria: style, content, originality (new contribution to scientific knowledge), and response to questions.
From the top, this means that I was looking for a well organised presentation supported by relevant figures/illustrations that is presented at a good pace. Most non-plenary talks at a conference are going to be short – 12-15 minutes most likely, with another 3-5 minutes for questions. It’s virtually impossible to include all of your fabulous research in this time without racing through, which isn’t fun for you or the audience. Sometimes you need to be ruthless when cutting down your talk – don’t delete those slides forever but keep them in reserve after your acknowledgements slide in case anyone asks a relevant question. There’s always room for a Blue Peter moment! When presenting, don’t be afraid of the odd pause. As a viewer it can be useful to take that time to digest the previous info. It’s also important to face your audience and project. I’m sure we’ve all experienced a conference talk or lecture where the presenter half faces the board at all times. Don’t be that person.
A presentation horror story: 42 slides in 12 minutes.
The last item on the list – response to questions – can be particularly challenging to students and is where I saw several presenters falter. The main criterion for answering questions is ‘concise and informed’, which basically means know what you’re talking about and don’t ramble. If you’re not sure exactly what the question is asking it’s completely okay to ask for clarification – some people in the audience aren’t good at framing their questions clearly, and I definitely wouldn’t hold that against you as a judge.
Let’s move on to posters, which are my favourite bit of any conference. Oral presentations are all well and good, but for me nothing beats having a good chat with a poster presenter. Even the awkward bits of poster sessions, like hanging around waiting to talk to someone about their poster when they’re halfway through their spiel with someone else – the choice to either sneak in and get half of the story or try and circle back later only to find that they’re talking to someone else now – are all part of the fun. This time as a judge, I was looking for posters with a novel and important scientific question that fully convey the research topic, including the background of the project. On the visual front, good visual impact was described as ‘an engaging artistic layout with good, relevant illustrations’, with maximum impact including ‘highly original artwork and layout’. Now this doesn’t mean that you actually need to include handmade artwork (although I did see some fantastic frog drawings). Examples of good poster designs include colours which catch your eye from across the room, but don’t clash or distract from the science. Conceptual illustrations for methods in the place of large amounts of text and simple figures that you don’t need to be inches away from to read the axis labels.
The best piece of advice that I can give for improving your poster design, is to attend conferences and look for poster designs that you do or don’t really like. What makes you think ‘wow, that looks interesting’? Ask the presenter if you can take a picture of their poster – most will be perfectly happy with this, especially if it’s for your own use and not going to be shared anywhere. This way you can slowly build up a ‘reference library’ of poster designs and layouts that you really think work and were clear and easy to follow. You can do the same with oral presentations, although this is actually easier with hybrid or online presentations where you can grab a screenshot and add it to your library. Think of this as a literature review on presenting/design styles.
As well as learning all of these handy tips for my own future presenting, there were a few unexpected benefits to participating as a judge. The biggest is that I was forced to visit posters or presentation sessions that I otherwise wouldn’t have more than glanced at. BES covers everything ‘Ecology’, and I usually end up focussing on sessions that are directly relevant to me – disease ecology, population ecology, mathematical methods. This time, I learned all about mistletoe distribution in the UK, and the endophyte communities of carnivorous plants. Taking part in this way definitely expanded my scientific horizons and was a lot of fun as well.
If you’re feeling hesitant about putting yourself forward for a student poster or presentation prize or joining in as a judge, I say go for it – there’s nothing to lose.
Feature image: AI image generated in Canva.
Blog post by Megan Griffiths.