I give a lot of talks. What useful advice can I give to other speakers? The simplest is not to write out your talk in advance. Unless you are a good enough actor to make it sound as though you are simply talking to the audience, which few of us are, reading from a written text sounds wooden and raises the question of why you didn’t let us read it ourselves instead of reading it to us like a parent reading to a child. Better to make your audience feel as if you are holding a conversation with them, although a one sided one until the question period.
I agree about PowerPoint. I have very successfully given talks with a 3x5 card of notes, just to keep me on track and make sure I get to my points before the clock.
Agreed. I always forgot 1 or 2 points if I didn’t have a card, particularly if a student asked a really interesting question. Of course I only lectured to greater than 40 students at once during job interviews, so maybe I would have found I needed more PowerPoints then instead of just a whiteboard.
I also always disappointed students who asked for my lecture notes and got 2-3 sentences and a few key words in a scrap of notebook paper :)
Powerpoints fail when they are used to help the speaker organize the presentation instead of to help the audience understand the presentation.
Slides with lengthy text bullets are effectively speaking notes getting pasted into the slide. Same with the tedious outline slide some people insist on (first I'll talk about this, then I'll talk about that.) It's critical for the speaker to have such an outline, but the audience doesn't need it. I'll know what you're going to talk about when you start talking about it.
Same with the two minutes per slide heuristic. It's used to keep the speaker on time and on topic, the audience doesn't care. Sometimes it's good to breeze through a bunch at once others you can leave up for 5 minutes. Move when you need the info on the next slide, not when you want to shift gears to the next topic. In text documents you don't have some rule that says you have a figure every two pages, you just bring in the information when it's needed to support the claims in the text.
I gave a talk a few weeks ago on how to run a roleplaying game campaign in a fictional setting that doesn't have its own published adaptation (or has one you don't care for), using a generic rules set such as Big Eyes Small Mouth, FUDGE, or GURPS. I used your approach, with an outline of topics to address rather than a prepared speech (and I had copies of the outline to hand out). I practiced delivering the talk several times in the preceding couple of weeks, not to get it word for word but to get a sense for how much I could say in the allotted time. I do think that kind of practice can be helpful.
I once used Power Point, for a talk on H.G. Wells's Little Wars, for which I had illustrations to show; but I haven't used it since. I must confess I detest that sort of presentation myself, which probably biases me.
I lectured for about 30 years without more than a short list of 5 or so points to be covered. 50 mimute classes, 75 minute classes, 3 hour grad classes. I found early on most students could not handle more than 5 major points in a session no matter how long the class was.
I practiced repition and redunc=dancy and told them it would happen.
The first day in class I always told the students, "If you attend class, listen attentively to me and the questions of your classmates and take good notes you can probably earn a C without opening a book. If you read the books carefully and make notes you can probably earn a C. If you want to earn a better grade you would be wise to do both." I was famous for "using" all the grades from A to F.
You say two things that are not the same: don't read from a script and don't write a script. I agree that you should not read from a script, but I find it useful to write out and discard a complete script.
As to the puzzle of why students may prefer talks to reading text books, I'm thinking that it could partly be due to laziness - after all, it is easier to be spoon-fed with info rather than actively having to read it yourself - and partly due to "the human factor", namely a wish to assess the personality of the speaker in order to judge the credibility of what the speaker is saying.
Personally, I find listening less work than reading, and I am probably not the only one who feels like that. It requires no eye movement. You can even close your eyes and just let the info flow. I suspect that is one of several reasons why audio-books and pod-casts have become so popular. But as you pointed out, reading is better if you want to ensure that you do not miss any important points.
Would you prefer an audio-book on a subject to a lecture on the subject? It has some of the same advantages as a print book, although looking back to reread something is a little harder.
It depends a bit on the circumstances. An audio-book can be listened to in the comfort of your home and at any time. But a lecture gives you a better feel of what the speaker is like as a person, and there may be some interesting interaction with the audience. Rightly or wrongly, that may influence your opinion and maybe even understanding of the subject matter.
The audio book gives you a voice, although it may not be the voice of the author — in my case it is. It doesn't give you a face. A video of a talk gives you both voice and face, probably a better view of the face than if you were in the audience, which gets us back to the other half of the puzzle, why a video recording isn't an adequate substitute for a live talk.
I think a video does come very close to offering the same attractions as a live talk as it may even include Q&As. Also, it has the added benefit of the viewer being able to rewind and fast forward. I suppose this accounts for the popularity of recorded talks on YouTube, which are probably watched by many more than those physically attending lectures. Still, attending a live lecture may, like you say, offer the prospect of asking questions to the speaker. It may also offer the possibility to interact with the speaker and the rest of the audience after the talk.
As a dissenting voice on this, I never listen to audio books; I prefer to read an actual text. Not only is it easier to look back if I want to check a point, but also the pace is faster. The spoken word is slow enough so that my attention tends to wander, and then I miss part of the content. I only like the spoken word for material where style is very important. For example, I have listened to a recording of T.S. Eliot reading "Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats," which tremendously helped my sense of the text.
I agree. I don't listen to audio-books myself for the same reasons as you but I can see the attraction of them. Some people don't mind missing part of the content if it means they can do other things at the same time such as driving or travelling.
I think the persistence of lectures is due to how much emotional energy humans can convey through speech. Some people can transmit excitement through writing, but seemingly very few. Not that everyone can do it through speech, but it seems to be a lot easier. It might just be me, but I find that when a writer pulls it off I am reading in a spoken voice, as opposed to just reading the words, as though someone is narrating to me.
Decades ago I had a seminar with one of the "Big Names" in his area. There were him and 7 grad students around a table. He droned in a montone, frequently while staring out a window. We had two pools: One on who would first pass out face first on the table, and one about who would not nod off the whole semester. It was just that exciting.
Woof, yea, I have had classes like that. You gotta wonder about lecturers like that, like how boring of a human are you where you can't even be excited about your own topic. I suppose some folks are just not entertaining or high energy, but man... what's your home life like? :D
I generally find lectures to be sleep-inducing. Perhaps a very good lecturer could overcome this problem, but such excellence is rare. (I’ve never heard your talks, so I make no comment on your excellence!)
You just taught me about filk. But I know Professor Friedman writes stories and now I know he also gives talks, so he's clearly a passionate educator. Maybe he put some of the economics stuff that I find hard to understand into a song.
I am quite non-musical so write poems, not songs. My book _The Machinery of Freedom_ has a poem at the beginning of each of the 6 sections. None are intended to teach economics, although some are relevant to it. Some of my other poems have been posted here.
I have written computer programs intended to teach economic ideas, to go with my Price Theory textbook, but that was a long time ago. If someone solves the aging problem I may eventually get back to it.
It's too bad because I don't enjoy reading fiction but I really like learning and teaching through songs. I've memorized a lot of stuff by putting it into a tune. When I taught modesty classes, I was pretty sure that only what I covered in the theme song was actually learned by anyone.
Of course, in France, there is an official body that has the function of excluding words that were not produced by governmental plan, and sometimes of actually producing words that way. I remember back in the twentieth century when French articles shifted from "computer" to "ordinateur," from "computer science" to "informatique," and from "software" to "logiciel" (I refer to articles in French, not to articles in English by the French).
I agree about PowerPoint. I have very successfully given talks with a 3x5 card of notes, just to keep me on track and make sure I get to my points before the clock.
Agreed. I always forgot 1 or 2 points if I didn’t have a card, particularly if a student asked a really interesting question. Of course I only lectured to greater than 40 students at once during job interviews, so maybe I would have found I needed more PowerPoints then instead of just a whiteboard.
I also always disappointed students who asked for my lecture notes and got 2-3 sentences and a few key words in a scrap of notebook paper :)
Powerpoints fail when they are used to help the speaker organize the presentation instead of to help the audience understand the presentation.
Slides with lengthy text bullets are effectively speaking notes getting pasted into the slide. Same with the tedious outline slide some people insist on (first I'll talk about this, then I'll talk about that.) It's critical for the speaker to have such an outline, but the audience doesn't need it. I'll know what you're going to talk about when you start talking about it.
Same with the two minutes per slide heuristic. It's used to keep the speaker on time and on topic, the audience doesn't care. Sometimes it's good to breeze through a bunch at once others you can leave up for 5 minutes. Move when you need the info on the next slide, not when you want to shift gears to the next topic. In text documents you don't have some rule that says you have a figure every two pages, you just bring in the information when it's needed to support the claims in the text.
I gave a talk a few weeks ago on how to run a roleplaying game campaign in a fictional setting that doesn't have its own published adaptation (or has one you don't care for), using a generic rules set such as Big Eyes Small Mouth, FUDGE, or GURPS. I used your approach, with an outline of topics to address rather than a prepared speech (and I had copies of the outline to hand out). I practiced delivering the talk several times in the preceding couple of weeks, not to get it word for word but to get a sense for how much I could say in the allotted time. I do think that kind of practice can be helpful.
I once used Power Point, for a talk on H.G. Wells's Little Wars, for which I had illustrations to show; but I haven't used it since. I must confess I detest that sort of presentation myself, which probably biases me.
I sometimes give a talk in my head in order to time it.
I lectured for about 30 years without more than a short list of 5 or so points to be covered. 50 mimute classes, 75 minute classes, 3 hour grad classes. I found early on most students could not handle more than 5 major points in a session no matter how long the class was.
I practiced repition and redunc=dancy and told them it would happen.
The first day in class I always told the students, "If you attend class, listen attentively to me and the questions of your classmates and take good notes you can probably earn a C without opening a book. If you read the books carefully and make notes you can probably earn a C. If you want to earn a better grade you would be wise to do both." I was famous for "using" all the grades from A to F.
You say two things that are not the same: don't read from a script and don't write a script. I agree that you should not read from a script, but I find it useful to write out and discard a complete script.
As to the puzzle of why students may prefer talks to reading text books, I'm thinking that it could partly be due to laziness - after all, it is easier to be spoon-fed with info rather than actively having to read it yourself - and partly due to "the human factor", namely a wish to assess the personality of the speaker in order to judge the credibility of what the speaker is saying.
Why is listening less work than reading? How is a book telling you things less spoon-feeding than a lecturer telling you things?
Personally, I find listening less work than reading, and I am probably not the only one who feels like that. It requires no eye movement. You can even close your eyes and just let the info flow. I suspect that is one of several reasons why audio-books and pod-casts have become so popular. But as you pointed out, reading is better if you want to ensure that you do not miss any important points.
Would you prefer an audio-book on a subject to a lecture on the subject? It has some of the same advantages as a print book, although looking back to reread something is a little harder.
It depends a bit on the circumstances. An audio-book can be listened to in the comfort of your home and at any time. But a lecture gives you a better feel of what the speaker is like as a person, and there may be some interesting interaction with the audience. Rightly or wrongly, that may influence your opinion and maybe even understanding of the subject matter.
The audio book gives you a voice, although it may not be the voice of the author — in my case it is. It doesn't give you a face. A video of a talk gives you both voice and face, probably a better view of the face than if you were in the audience, which gets us back to the other half of the puzzle, why a video recording isn't an adequate substitute for a live talk.
I think a video does come very close to offering the same attractions as a live talk as it may even include Q&As. Also, it has the added benefit of the viewer being able to rewind and fast forward. I suppose this accounts for the popularity of recorded talks on YouTube, which are probably watched by many more than those physically attending lectures. Still, attending a live lecture may, like you say, offer the prospect of asking questions to the speaker. It may also offer the possibility to interact with the speaker and the rest of the audience after the talk.
As a dissenting voice on this, I never listen to audio books; I prefer to read an actual text. Not only is it easier to look back if I want to check a point, but also the pace is faster. The spoken word is slow enough so that my attention tends to wander, and then I miss part of the content. I only like the spoken word for material where style is very important. For example, I have listened to a recording of T.S. Eliot reading "Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats," which tremendously helped my sense of the text.
I agree. I don't listen to audio-books myself for the same reasons as you but I can see the attraction of them. Some people don't mind missing part of the content if it means they can do other things at the same time such as driving or travelling.
I think the persistence of lectures is due to how much emotional energy humans can convey through speech. Some people can transmit excitement through writing, but seemingly very few. Not that everyone can do it through speech, but it seems to be a lot easier. It might just be me, but I find that when a writer pulls it off I am reading in a spoken voice, as opposed to just reading the words, as though someone is narrating to me.
Decades ago I had a seminar with one of the "Big Names" in his area. There were him and 7 grad students around a table. He droned in a montone, frequently while staring out a window. We had two pools: One on who would first pass out face first on the table, and one about who would not nod off the whole semester. It was just that exciting.
Woof, yea, I have had classes like that. You gotta wonder about lecturers like that, like how boring of a human are you where you can't even be excited about your own topic. I suppose some folks are just not entertaining or high energy, but man... what's your home life like? :D
We all suspected he loved his research but not teaching in any form. He had one grad class about every two years.
I generally find lectures to be sleep-inducing. Perhaps a very good lecturer could overcome this problem, but such excellence is rare. (I’ve never heard your talks, so I make no comment on your excellence!)
Lots of them on my web site, if that counts.
Do you ever make up songs?
Filk? Or tunes?
You just taught me about filk. But I know Professor Friedman writes stories and now I know he also gives talks, so he's clearly a passionate educator. Maybe he put some of the economics stuff that I find hard to understand into a song.
I am quite non-musical so write poems, not songs. My book _The Machinery of Freedom_ has a poem at the beginning of each of the 6 sections. None are intended to teach economics, although some are relevant to it. Some of my other poems have been posted here.
There are economic ideas in my novels, although that isn't what they are about. I discussed them in an old post here: https://daviddfriedman.substack.com/p/economics-in-my-fiction-9a0
I have written computer programs intended to teach economic ideas, to go with my Price Theory textbook, but that was a long time ago. If someone solves the aging problem I may eventually get back to it.
And I hope the aging problem is solved today!
It's too bad because I don't enjoy reading fiction but I really like learning and teaching through songs. I've memorized a lot of stuff by putting it into a tune. When I taught modesty classes, I was pretty sure that only what I covered in the theme song was actually learned by anyone.
Have you ever tried using a poem?
---
Government produces all order.
Under anarchy there is no government.
Therefore anarchy is chaos.
Q.E.D.
-
In Washington there isn't any plan
With "feeding David" on page sixty-four;
It must be accidental that the milk man
Leaves a bottle at my door.
-
It must be accidental that the butcher
Has carcasses arriving at his shop,
The very place where, when I need some meat,
I accidentally stop.
-
My life is chaos turned miraculous;
I speak a word and people understand
Although it must be gibberish since words
Are not produced by governmental plan.
-
Now law and order, on the other hand,
The state provides us for the public good;
That's why there's instant justice on demand
And safety in every neighborhood.
-
[The dashes are to force the interface not to eliminate the blank line]
Of course, in France, there is an official body that has the function of excluding words that were not produced by governmental plan, and sometimes of actually producing words that way. I remember back in the twentieth century when French articles shifted from "computer" to "ordinateur," from "computer science" to "informatique," and from "software" to "logiciel" (I refer to articles in French, not to articles in English by the French).
I love it!