Re: [Phys-L] (May 2012) Re: every article should have an abstract

[Carl Mungan <mungan@usna.edu>]

> "Tell them what you're going to tell them; tell them; and tell them what you told them."


I don’t fully agree.

I agree articles should have abstracts, intro, and conclusion. But they’re a permanent written document that can be read multiple times in different ways and referenced in the future.

A talk normally cannot be experienced more than once. (I will make exceptions for longer, recorded talks where it is known a priori that it is going to be archived and watched off real time, quite possibly in nonlinear “jump around” ways.)

A short talk gets boring if things are repeated too much. I think there should instead be more of a “short story” nature to it: an intriguing hook to open it, an arc that builds up to a surprise, a quick ending leaving the audience with one key take-home.

Purely my opinion, but if a presenter in a 10 to 15 minute talk starts by reading (or reciting from memory) his/her title slide and outline, I attend to other matters until they are ready to start the interesting part of their talk.

Again, in a long (45 to 60 minute) talk, I would agree more that a road map at the beginning (and middle) and end are much more valuable. Even so, I would avoid exact repetitions in either a verbal or a written presentation. What you’re going to tell me, before I understand what your presentation is really all about, should be different than what you remind me you told me at the end. -Carl

-----
Carl E. Mungan, Professor of Physics  410-293-6680 (O) -3729 (F)
Naval Academy Stop 9b, 572C Holloway Rd, Annapolis MD 21402-1363 
mailto:mungan@usna.edu     http://usna.edu/Users/physics/mungan/