next »

[wonderingphd]

I'm going to be presenting at a conference.  My usual approach to this is to go through my paper and cut pieces out until I think I can get through in the allotted time . This time, however, I am sending a paper that is too long to present to someone who will respond to it, and most of what is there is really needed to make my case.  How can I solve the dilemma of needing to write a complete paper for the respondant and yet cut it down for the audience but still make it cogent? 

[donstefano]

Rule no 1: every paper can be cut down to 8000 words, and subsequently to 7 ppt slides.
rule no 2: if rule no 1 does not hold for your paper, turn paper into 2 different papers

[normative_]

I concur with Don Stefano.

[cranefly]

Explain to a friend who doesn't know your area what your paper is about. Those points are your main slides. Throw in a few examples/evidence, and that's your presentation.

[sugaree]

As a commentator, I have received too-long conference papers before (generally, it's grad students sending me full chapters upon which their presentation is based, rather than trying to cut down for the presentation itself although faculty are not immune from such ill-advised practices). When I have received such papers, I email the author and ask which ten pages they'll be presenting? If I don't get a response, I don't bother preparing comments for the paper.

IOW, cut your paper. No, not everything currently there is "needed" to make your point. Commentators understand that conference presentations come from larger works of research.

[fiona]

You can cut quotations to a minimum, omit all apologies and qualifiers, and where you have two examples, use only one.

In short, cut cut cut. Otherwise you are being selfish and rude.

The Fiona, who's been burned by the long-winded

[normative_]

One of my wisest advisors in grad school told my research group once:

"If you can't say it in the time limit, you can't say it at all." And he was right.

That applies to papers as well. When I get these papers as a reviewer (and the journal editors should know better), I send it back with a reject no matter what. Typically, I can write "The reader doesn't know what's important yet. S/he should figure that out and submit when s/he's ready."

[goldenapple]

You are not going to present everything you need to make your case. That is not going to happen. But on the bright side, no one else gets to do this either, otherwise, journal articles would all be 4 pages long.

Either present a few pieces of really great (and previously unexamined) evidence and dump everything else, including your argument, or explain that your evidence exists and then present your conclusion. Actually, conferences are ideal for the former type of presentation.

[mended_drum]

And remember that all that stuff you need to make your point?  That's what the question-and-answer session is for.

[larryc]

Keep your assertions and remove your evidence. This should make for a lively Q&A after.

[lenniel]

You can cut quotations to a minimum, omit all apologies and qualifiers, and where you have two examples, use only one.

In short, cut cut cut. Otherwise you are being selfish and rude.

The Fiona, who's been burned by the long-winded

Hear, hear.  There is nothing more frustrating than being incarcerated at a panel while someone goes over the time limit.  Inevitably, the time hogs have nothing of value to say, or are so disorganized the point of the paper is lost. At one conference I attended this spring, I really thought the audience was going to pummel the speaker afterwards, their paper was so long and, sadly, truly awful.

Cut, practice reading out loud for time, then cut again.  People will ask questions.

[the_honey_badger]

Keep your assertions and remove your evidence. This should make for a lively Q&A after.

Best and most hilarious advice ever.

[shrek]

I make my students summarize their talks in 2-3 words. YES WORDS (I used to only let them have one word, but I've gotten soft in my old age). Then 1 sentence. The idea here is that if you want your audience to remember ONE point (and that's about all they'll remember) what is it? Build out from there. What presenters often don't get is that a conference paper and a written journal paper are VERY different animals.

[larryc]

Keep your assertions and remove your evidence. This should make for a lively Q&A after.

Best and most hilarious advice ever.

Thanks. I am perfectly serious though!

OP, you already have given shorter versions of this topic, many times in fact. You do it whenever your mother calls to ask how you are, when you grab a beer with a colleague, when your department chair asks "How is going?," when you update your Facebook page.

Back up a bit, forget that you are [solemn tone] giving a paper [/solemn tone] and just think about what is cool and interesting about your work. Write down 5 things. Now create a one paragraph introduction and conclusion. You are done.

The world would be a better place if all of us approached conference presentations this way.

(And I wish I had done so more often...)

[wonderingphd]

  Thanks for the advice. I had no intention of going too long.  That's why I'm trying to figure out how to cut my paper down.  I cut it down to about 6200 words and I have thirty minutes.  Is that paper still too long?  When I've practiced a paper my time never seems to match what it actually takes to do it, so I'm not trying to avoid practicing. I just want to know what others think. 

   As an aside, I have seen lots of mentions of slides. At least in my area, biblical studies, I can count on one hand the number of papers I've heard where there were PowerPoint slides.  I'm wondering if slides are a discipline-specific thing (e.g., maybe psychology conferences expect slides while my discipline does not) or if I should be using slides even if hardly anyone else does.