• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
PowerPoint Kills
 

PowerPoint Kills

on

  • 13,871 views

Effective Teacher and Student Presentations. For a narrated version, please see: http://www.slideshare.net/oripsolob/powerpoint-kills-narrated ...

Effective Teacher and Student Presentations. For a narrated version, please see: http://www.slideshare.net/oripsolob/powerpoint-kills-narrated
Also visit: www.spirobolos.com or http://instagram.com/oripsolob

Statistics

Views

Total Views
13,871
Views on SlideShare
13,362
Embed Views
509

Actions

Likes
45
Downloads
2
Comments
8

14 Embeds 509

http://anamericanstudies.posthaven.com 397
http://newtrier.libguides.com 44
http://www.slideshare.net 33
http://tumblr.apps.wix.com 13
http://bmellett.tumblr.com 7
http://safe.txmblr.com 4
https://twitter.com 2
http://www.etceter.com 2
http://www.mefeedia.com 2
http://pinterest.com 1
http://yandex.ru 1
http://bb.alvincollege.edu 1
https://bboard.ocsb.ca 1
http://ntesx01-lic.nths.net 1
More...

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel

18 of 8 previous next Post a comment

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    PowerPoint Kills PowerPoint Kills Presentation Transcript

    • PowerPoint KILLS Effective Teacher and Student Presentations Spiro Bolos, New Trier High School
    • PowerPoint KILLS ?
    • “Imagine a widely used and expensive prescription drug that claimed to make us beautiful but didn’t. Instead the drug had frequent, serious side effects: making us stupid, degrading the quality and credibility of our communication, turning us into bores, wasting our colleagues’ time. The side effects, and the resulting unsatisfactory cost/ benefit ratio, would rightly lead to a worldwide product recall.” — Edward Tufte, The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint
    • COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD ENGINEERING BY VIEWGRAPHS The Debris Assessment Team presented its analysis in a formal Tufte also criticized the sloppy language on the slide. “The briefing to the Mission Evaluation Room that relied on Power- vaguely quantitative words ‘significant’ and ‘significantly’ are Point slides from Boeing. When engineering analyses and risk used 5 times on this slide,” he notes, “with de facto meanings assessments are condensed to fit on a standard form or overhead ranging from ‘detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case slide, information is inevitably lost. In the process, the prior- study’ to ‘an amount of damage so that everyone dies’ to ‘a dif- ity assigned to information can be easily misrepresented by its ference of 640-fold.’ ” 40 Another example of sloppiness is that placement on a chart and the language that is used. Dr. Edward “cubic inches” is written inconsistently: “3cu. In,” “1920cu in,” Tufte of Yale University, an expert in information presentation and “3 cu in.” While such inconsistencies might seem minor, in who also researched communications failures in the Challenger highly technical fields like aerospace engineering a misplaced accident, studied how the slides used by the Debris Assessment decimal point or mistaken unit of measurement can easily Team in their briefing to the Mission Evaluation Room misrep- engender inconsistencies and inaccuracies. In another phrase resented key information.38 “Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass and velocity,” the word “it” actually refers to “damage to the protec- The slide created six levels of hierarchy, signified by the title tive tiles.” and the symbols to the left of each line. These levels prioritized information that was already contained in 11 simple sentences. As information gets passed up an organization hierarchy, from Tufte also notes that the title is confusing. “Review of Test Data people who do analysis to mid-level managers to high-level Indicates Conservatism” refers not to the predicted tile damage, leadership, key explanations and supporting information is fil- but to the choice of test models used to predict the damage. tered out. In this context, it is easy to understand how a senior manager might read this PowerPoint slide and not realize that it Only at the bottom of the slide do engineers state a key piece of addresses a life-threatening situation. information: that one estimate of the debris that struck Columbia was 640 times larger than the data used to calibrate the model on At many points during its investigation, the Board was sur- which engineers based their damage assessments. (Later analy- prised to receive similar presentation slides from NASA offi- sis showed that the debris object was actually 400 times larger). cials in place of technical reports. The Board views the endemic This difference led Tufte to suggest that a more appropriate use of PowerPoint briefing slides instead of technical papers as headline would be “Review of Test Data Indicates Irrelevance an illustration of the problematic methods of technical com- of Two Models.” 39 munication at NASA. The vaguely quantitative words "significant" and "significantly" are used 5 times on this slide, with de facto meanings ranging from "detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study" to "an amount of damage so that everyone dies" to "a difference of 640-fold." None of these 5 usages appears to refer to the technical meaning of "statistical significance." Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile The low resolution of PowerPoint slides promotes Penetration the use of compressed phrases like "Tile Penetration." As is the case here, such phrases may well be ambiquous. • The existing SOFI on tile test data used to create Crater was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data (The low resolution and large font generate 3 typographic orphans, lonely words dangling on a seperate line.) – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for This vague pronoun reference "it" alludes to damage 3cu. In) to the protective tiles,which caused the destruction of the • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle Columbia. The slide weakens important material with to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating ambiquous language (sentence fragments, passive voice, Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass multiple meanings of "significant"). The 3 reports and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause were created by engineers for high-level NASA officials significant damage who were deciding whether the threat of wing damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) required further investigation before the Columbia can cause significant tile damage attempted return. The officials were satisfied that the – Flight condition is significantly outside of test database reports indicated that the Columbia was not in danger, • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test and no attempts to further examine the threat were 2/21/03 6 made. The slides were part of an oral presentation and also were circulated as e-mail attachments. In this slide the same unit of measure for volume (cubic inches) is shown a different way every time 3cu. in 1920cu. in 3 cu. in rather than in clear and tidy exponential form 1920 in 3 . Perhaps the available font cannot show exponents. Shakiness in units of measurement provokes concern. Slides that use hierarchical bullet-outlines here do not handle statistical data and scientific notation gracefully. If PowerPoint is a corporate-mandated format for all engineering reports, then some competent scientific typography (rather than the PP market-pitch style) is essential. In this slide, the typography is so choppy and clunky that it impedes understanding. The analysis by Dr. Edward Tufte of the slide from the Debris Assessment Team briefing. [SOFI=Spray-On Foam Insulation] Report Volume I August 2003 191
    • The vaguely quantitative words "significant" and "significantly" are used 5 times on this slide, with de facto meanings ranging from "detectable in largely irrelevant calibration case study" to "an amount of damage so that everyone dies" to "a difference of 640-fold." None of these 5 usages appears to refer to the technical meaning of "statistical significance." Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile The low resolution of PowerPoint slides promotes Penetration the use of compressed phrases like "Tile Penetration." As is the case here, such phrases may well be ambiquous. • The existing SOFI on tile test data used to create Crater was reviewed along with STS-107 Southwest Research data (The low resolution and large font generate 3 typographic orphans, lonely words dangling on a seperate line.) – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for This vague pronoun reference "it" alludes to damage 3cu. In) to the protective tiles,which caused the destruction of the • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle Columbia. The slide weakens important material with to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating ambiquous language (sentence fragments, passive voice, Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass multiple meanings of "significant"). The 3 reports and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause were created by engineers for high-level NASA officials significant damage who were deciding whether the threat of wing damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) required further investigation before the Columbia can cause significant tile damage attempted return. The officials were satisfied that the – Flight condition is significantly outside of test database reports indicated that the Columbia was not in danger, • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test and no attempts to further examine the threat were 2/21/03 6 made. The slides were part of an oral presentation and also were circulated as e-mail attachments. In this slide the same unit of measure for volume (cubic inches) is shown a different way every time 3cu. in 1920cu. in 3 cu. in rather than in clear and tidy exponential form 1920 in 3 . Perhaps the available font cannot show exponents. Shakiness in units of measurement provokes concern. Slides that use hierarchical bullet-outlines here do not handle statistical data and scientific notation gracefully. If PowerPoint is a corporate-mandated format for all engineering reports, then some competent scientific typography (rather than the PP market-pitch style) is essential. In this slide, the typography is so choppy and clunky that it impedes understanding. The analysis by Dr. Edward Tufte of the slide from the Debris Assessment Team briefing. [SOFI=Spray-On Foam Insulation]
    • meaning calibrati everyone these 5 u of "statis Review Of Test Data Indicates Conservatism for Tile “In the reports, every single text-slide The low Penetration the use o As is the usesreviewed along tile test data used 4 create Crater was bullet-outlines with to to 6 levels • The existing SOFI onwith STS-107 Southwest Research data (The low orphans, of hierarchy. Then another multi-level – Crater overpredicted penetration of tile coating significantly list, another bureaucracy of bullets, • Initial penetration to described by normal velocity Varies with volume/mass of projectile(e.g., 200ft/sec for This vag 3cu. In) to the pr starts afresh for a new slide. • Significant energy is required for the softer SOFI particle to penetrate the relatively hard tile coating Columbi ambiquo Test results do show that it is possible at sufficient mass multiple and velocity • Conversely, once tile is penetrated SOFI can cause were cre How is it that each elaborate significant damage Minor variations in total energy (above penetration level) who wer required architecture of thought always can cause significant tile damage attempte – Flight condition is significantly outside of test database reports i • Volume of ramp is 1920cu in vs 3 cu in for test fits exactly on one slide?” and no a 2/21/03 6 made. T also wer In this sl (cubic in rather th
    • “Life After Death By PPT”
    • “Particularly disturbing is the adoption of the PowerPoint cognitive style in our schools. Rather than learning to write a report using sentences, children are being taught how to formulate client pitches and infomercials.” — Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”
    • RESEARCH
    • dual-channels
    • “Multimedia Principle”
    • “Contiguity Principle”
    • “Coherence Principle”
    • (cognitive load)
    • versus
    • “[I]n designing a PowerPoint slide it is important to not present an overwhelming amount of information (i.e., coherence principle) and it is useful to have simple graphics to supplement words (i.e., multimedia principle).”
    • “Personalization Principle”
    • EXEMPLARS
    • The “Lessig Method”
    • www.ted.com
    • GUIDES
    • danger, alert renewal fave trust
    • SOURCES
    • flickrSTORM http://www.zoo-m.com/flickr-storm/
    • AFTERWARDS
    • “Studies by...Mayer et al. (2003) showed beneficial effects of giving learners control over the pacing of their multimedia instructions in terms of learning results” (346). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning  — Richard E. Mayer
    • “PowerPoint is a competent slide manager and projector. But rather than supplementing a presentation, it has become a substitute for it. Such misuse ignores the most important rule of speaking: Respect your audience.” — Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”
    • • PowerPoint icon: http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/File:Powerpoint_mac_2008_icon.png • Dr. Richard Mayer: http:// www.psych.ucsb.edu/people/faculty/mayer/ index.php • The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning by Richard E. Mayer • Bill Gates: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ worldeconomicforum/350245689/
    • • Interview with Richard Mayer: http:// www.sociablemedia.com/ articles_mayer.htm • Edward Tufte, “PowerPoint is Evil”: http:// www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.09/ ppt2.html • Columbia shuttle debris: http:// history.nasa.gov/columbia/debris_pics.html • Sunset: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ wavy1/2303062662/
    • • Columbia launch: http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/ BROWSE/columbia_1.html • Richard E. Mayer: http://www.udel.edu/PR/ UDaily/2008/jul/Mayerlg.jpg • The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: http:// www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/powerpoint • “Entering Hyperspace”: http:// www.flickr.com/photos/eole/380316678/
    • • Sports Designer of the Year: http:// www.sportsdesigner.com/ 1/2007/02/2006_sports_des.html • 2 computers image: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/timsamoff/144022496/ • Limited capacity image: http:// www.flickr.com/photos/fotex/217896072/ • Steve Jobs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ acaben/541334636/
    • • Lawrence Lessig: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/joi/2115184003/ • “Dodging Bullets in Presentations”: http:// www.slideshare.net/RowanManahan/ dodging-bullets-in-presentations • “Our Direction”: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/b-tal/116220689/ • One Hour PPT: http://jakes.editme.com/ onehourppt
    • • “Sources”: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ theklan/527782553/ • An Introduction to FlickrStorm: http:// www.teachertube.com/view_video.php? viewkey=6fa63738371ec0d5df81 • Ear: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ lintmachine/2251514423/ • Eye: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ simonpais/59039141/