Waffle Wednesday
Every Wednesday at IRIS, we have a scientific talk during lunch hour. Sometimes members of the working group present their research; sometimes we invite a student from another university to share their work. The environment is pretty informal, as the audience is eating lunch while the speaker presents. It's a good chance for us all to know what our colleagues are up to. Also, there are waffles.
I should explain about the waffles, because my American friends will not understand what I mean. In Europe, waffles are not a breakfast food to be smothered in butter and syrup at Sunday brunch; they are dessert. The waffle batter is quite sweet, and they're served warm with sour cream and jam on top. Some Norwegians top their waffles with brown cheese, which is a sweet dairy product made from whey. It has the consistency of normal cheese, but the lactose is carmelized to make it sweet. It's also perfectly acceptable to eat a waffle with your hands.
I always look forward to Waffle Wednesday because I enjoy hearing about others' research, and the waffles are pretty good too. During lunch hour yesterday, I was the featured speaker, and I had the chance to present my research to my IRIS colleagues.
I shared with them the results of the image analysis I recently completed. I've told you about my image analysis multiple times on this blog - it's the one I've been writing up; the manuscript that's currently in the Draft 2 stage of its life cycle. I was able to adapt all of the figures and most of the content of my manuscript into Powerpoint for my presentation, but there are some key differences between writing a paper and giving a talk. A paper is a permanent record. It never changes, so if your reader didn't understand something, they can go back and re-read it or look up other papers on the topic. In a talk, you only have the present moment to explain something, and if you move on before your audience is ready, they'll be lost for the rest of the presentation. As I put together my presentation, I found myself streamlining the content of my analysis but explaining each concept in a little greater depth. The flow of ideas is also critical during a talk. Unlike a paper, which has clearly-defined sections, a presentation is a bit more free-form, so I can pull in outside tangents as long as they flow logically with the other material.
After a scientific talk, there's usually a question-and-answer period. Sometimes, the dialogue that ensues can be more informative than the talk itself. I was really hoping to get at least a few questions yesterday, because questions indicate that the audience was engaged and thinking along with you during the presentation. The act of asking a question tells the speaker "I think your research is important." You can maybe imagine, then, how elated I was to get three good questions. I was even approached by two colleagues later that afternoon; one asked for a list of the papers I had referenced, and the other wanted to talk about the methods I had used.
It was so very validating to have not only a successful presentation but to be approached by colleagues asking for more information. It showed me that my work is in fact important. Yesterday was a great Waffle Wednesday.
I should explain about the waffles, because my American friends will not understand what I mean. In Europe, waffles are not a breakfast food to be smothered in butter and syrup at Sunday brunch; they are dessert. The waffle batter is quite sweet, and they're served warm with sour cream and jam on top. Some Norwegians top their waffles with brown cheese, which is a sweet dairy product made from whey. It has the consistency of normal cheese, but the lactose is carmelized to make it sweet. It's also perfectly acceptable to eat a waffle with your hands.
I always look forward to Waffle Wednesday because I enjoy hearing about others' research, and the waffles are pretty good too. During lunch hour yesterday, I was the featured speaker, and I had the chance to present my research to my IRIS colleagues.
I shared with them the results of the image analysis I recently completed. I've told you about my image analysis multiple times on this blog - it's the one I've been writing up; the manuscript that's currently in the Draft 2 stage of its life cycle. I was able to adapt all of the figures and most of the content of my manuscript into Powerpoint for my presentation, but there are some key differences between writing a paper and giving a talk. A paper is a permanent record. It never changes, so if your reader didn't understand something, they can go back and re-read it or look up other papers on the topic. In a talk, you only have the present moment to explain something, and if you move on before your audience is ready, they'll be lost for the rest of the presentation. As I put together my presentation, I found myself streamlining the content of my analysis but explaining each concept in a little greater depth. The flow of ideas is also critical during a talk. Unlike a paper, which has clearly-defined sections, a presentation is a bit more free-form, so I can pull in outside tangents as long as they flow logically with the other material.
After a scientific talk, there's usually a question-and-answer period. Sometimes, the dialogue that ensues can be more informative than the talk itself. I was really hoping to get at least a few questions yesterday, because questions indicate that the audience was engaged and thinking along with you during the presentation. The act of asking a question tells the speaker "I think your research is important." You can maybe imagine, then, how elated I was to get three good questions. I was even approached by two colleagues later that afternoon; one asked for a list of the papers I had referenced, and the other wanted to talk about the methods I had used.
It was so very validating to have not only a successful presentation but to be approached by colleagues asking for more information. It showed me that my work is in fact important. Yesterday was a great Waffle Wednesday.
Comments
Post a Comment