Go to the U of M home page
School of Physics & Astronomy
Physics & Astronomy Wiki


Presentation Guidelines

Presentations are meant to help guide and spur discussion. They should be at most 5 minutes (~5 slides max) and should try to explain the trickier points rather than summarize the entire paper. (This semester we will enforce a 5 slide maximum)

  • Remember that this is a casual discussion of the week's paper and your presentation is simply a spark for discussion.
  • All you need to do is introduce difficult ideas or terminology, and begin the discussion. Remember that we all should have read the paper.
  • 1 slide is about 1 min of presentation. We will impose a 5 slide maximum.
  • Making slides of the figures of the paper is a good idea so that we can bring them up for discussion. Do not feel the need to discuss each figure while presenting.
  • Practice the talk if you are uncomfortable, or uncertain about the time. Remember this is a casual discussion.

Paper Selection Guidelines

  • The paper should be at most 10 pages. This limit is in place not only because we all have things to od but also because we only have a limited discussion time.
  • The paper should be accessible to the general 2nd or 3rd year physics grad. I know everyone loves their research and is deeply involved in it, but try to remember the rest of us are not.
  • Try to avoid papers which rely too heavily on information from source papers.
  • Choose a paper that you are interested in!

Reading Tips

These are some guidelines to help to critically analyze papers while reading. These are also good guidelines for how to present papers at Journal Club meetings.

Note: These are only suggestions, and are no substitute for thinking about the papers! Please feel free to alter/add ideas. This is supposed to help us get more out of the reading!

  • What questions does the author raise? Which does the article try to answer?
  • What is the theory? What is expected?
  • What is the methodology used? Was it carried out correctly? What are limitations?
  • What were the results?
  • What were the conclusions? Do these support the expectations? Are they reasonable?
  • Is all the necessary information presented in the article? Are there questions left unanswered?
  • How could the paper be improved? What doors are opened for further research?
  • What background information may be useful to those outside the field?
groups/journal_club/guidelines.txt · Last modified: 2010/08/30 20:37 by pastika