folio 16/2 January 2015

F O L I O 1 6 / 2

Developing A Closer Understanding

of Academic Oral Presentations
Peter Levrai and Averil Bolster

close questioning audience while Electrical Engineering

Introduction students need to present a circuit board they have built,
Oral Presentations are an important part of studying discuss its performance in relation to theory, and make
in an English-medium university environment and the business case for how it may be applied. Ultimately
will be something many students face, whatever their it may be a presentation task, like a viva, which is the
field of study. Such presentations can be particularly culmination of a student’s academic career.
challenging for non-native English speakers (NNES).
Despite the importance of oral presentations as a form
of academic discourse, they remain a relatively under- Substance over style
researched area and an area where there is limited
Over the course of the academic year 2011-12 there
targeted EAP presentation training materials. There
was an opportunity to observe students delivering
is no clear conceptualization in the existing literature
presentations for their lecturers. While watching
of which the authors are aware as to the key features
Environmental Science research presentations the
that make a presentation academic. This paper aims to
particular challenges of an academic presentation
redress that issue with the aim of then evaluating the
became clear. One of the first students approached
training materials currently available to help NNES
the presentation as they may have been told to in
develop their academic oral presentation skills.
a generic presentation course and they had strong
Through discussion with lecturers from different presentation skills, speaking confidently and clearly.
disciplines it can be determined that the same level of From a language teacher’s perspective they seemed to
academic rigour is expected of an oral presentation as have dealt with the task well. When it came time for
would be demanded from a written piece of work - an questions, however, the substance of their presentation
academically sound oral presentation should be logical, was seriously challenged by their lecturers and the
coherent, research-based and referenced. A criteria- academic rigour expected from student presentations
driven evaluation of EAP presentation titles suggests was highlighted.
that while they are relatively successful in developing
A later student, while not as linguistically competent
technical presentation skills they may not be meeting
or confident as the first, gave a presentation which
the expectations of lecturers in terms of enabling
was much more positively received by the lecturers.
students to generate academically sound presentations.
She achieved this by transposing the structure of a
written research assignment to an oral presentation.
Her presentation opened with a review of the current
Why presentations? research and knowledge in the area, which led to
Oral presentations are an important part of the identifying the gap in knowledge and outlining what
undergraduate university experience (Zappa-Hollman, her research project was designed to find out. She
2007) and can be considered ‘a key skill in academic moved through the methodology of her approach,
life.' (Alexander, Argent and Spencer, 2008, p.245). presented the results and in the discussion and
This assertion is certainly true in the context this conclusion returned to her research question and
project took place – that of University of Nottingham evaluated how successfully she had found out what
Ningbo China (UNNC), a branch campus of University she had intended. When it came time for questions
of Nottingham UK, where students of all disciplines in from her lecturers she was able to deal with them
various years of their undergraduate and postgraduate confidently and appropriately. Despite her linguistic
degree programmes carry out presentations in their disadvantage compared to the earlier presenter, she
studies. Presentation tasks range from informal seminar was able to present academically more effectively
presentations of a journal article the students have by focusing on the purpose of the presentation and
read to thirty-second poster pitch group presentations ensuring the audience was clear about the logical
during which students have to try to sell an innovation. progression of her research project.
Architecture students have to manage maps, concept
This observation is in line with a point made by
panels and models as they present their design to a

65
 folio 16/2 January 2015

Alexander et al. (2008, p.249), that presentation specialities covered by the lecturers was of great use
feedback to students in an EAP context should because it highlighted that presentations are used in
focus on higher level task achievement (clarity of a wide variety of subjects. Apart from the variety of
purpose, use of evidence) rather than surface language disciplines, there was also diversity within the group of
issues. In the way a student could have linguistically lecturers Participants came from countries such as the
sophisticated writing skills (in terms of grammatical US, the UK, Egypt, Nigeria, the Netherlands, Singapore
control and lexical flexibility) yet still have problems and Australia. In terms of gender, there were five men
in producing an academically sound essay, so might a and three women.
student have effective presentation skills (in terms of
delivery) and yet fail to deliver an academically sound We met with the lecturers individually and the discussions
presentation. The success of a presentation, from a were videoed for later review. The framework was
subject lecturer viewpoint, seems to be on the delivery relatively open to allow for the opportunity for on-the-
of a well-argued, supported, logical presentation which spot clarification and exploration of topics which
demonstrates understanding of the topic rather than came from the lecturers. Each discussion lasted 15-20
students simply demonstrating good presentation minutes and the four major topics of discussion were:
skills. A concern of this paper is to determine how well
1. Why are student presentations used in higher
current commercially available materials help develop
education?
such skills.
2. What kind of presenting and presentations do your
students have to do?
Understanding academic oral
3. What makes a good presentation for your division?
presentations
4. What makes a presentation academic?
Despite the importance of presentations there are
surprisingly few commercial EAP materials available and they were followed up with detailed questions. The
which specialise in oral presentations for students. responses are summarised below.
Academic reading, writing and listening skills books
dominate the market. This relative dearth of academic Why are student presentations used in
presentation materials may be due to the fact that in Higher Education?
comparison to ‘the research article, which is the most
researched academic genre, little work has been done to Five of the eight lecturers (A, D, F, G and H) stated
describe the spoken academic genres’ (Flowerdew and in different ways that presenting is an important
Peacock, 2001, p 188). As Ferris and Tagg noted in 1996, communication skill which is transferable to
not much work had been done exploring oral academic the students’ future life in the world of work.
literacy, and this is still sadly the case and presented Communicating information, especially information
difficulty when researching this paper. The lack of which the students themselves have found, seems to
depth in the research field of academic presentations be the key reason for using presentations in academic
was highlighted by Miles (n.d.) although the issue work. There was a slightly different but by no means
is slowly being addressed. For example, Seliman less important reason given by Lecturer D, who
and Naitim (unpublished) investigated the moves in succinctly stated that an academic presentation was
English for Workspace presentations and Soureshjani ‘the truest measure of mastery of the subject matter’.
and Ghanbari (2012) considered the factors which In essence, the three main reasons for doing academic
impact the effectiveness of an academic presentation. presentations are as follows:
What is lacking, however, is any significant published
research building on the findings of Zappa-Hollman a. The academic presentation provides important
(2007) describing the key features which contribute to transferable communication skills
a successful academic oral presentation.
b. Presentations based on research allow students to
make their own discoveries and learn independently
Delving deeper c. How much and how well students know the subject
We aimed to add to this understanding of the needs of matter can be identified in academic presentations.
an academic presentation course through discussions
with faculty staff from UNNC and a visiting professor What kind of presenting and presentations
from an American university. The lecturers came do your students have to do?
from the disciplines of Architecture (Lecturer A),
Business (Lecturers B and C), Law and Business Each lecturer talked about their own particular type
(Lecturer D), Environmental Science (Lecturer E), of presentation or genre although many similarities
Education (Lecturer F), English Studies (Lecturer G) exist across the disciplines, such as the prevalence
and International Studies (Lecturer H).The breadth of for both individual and group presentations. Formal

66
 folio 16/2 January 2015

assessments and more informal ‘stand up and give synthesising of sources that contributes to making a
their views’ (Lecturer B) types are also common across presentation academic for Lecturer G.
different branches of study. The immediate response
from Lecturers A and E (both from the school of Lecturers C and D did not refer to citations or
Science and Engineering) to this question was that verifiability explicitly but they did express what a
their students always have to present their research. presentation being academic means to them. Lecturer
D believed it should be ‘borne of research techniques’
What makes a good presentation for your with a solid argument. He followed this by saying that
a student presenter should never simply ‘parrot’ the
division? research because ‘if you cannot speak freely about the
While there is a great deal of subjectivity when it comes subject matter, you do not have mastery of the subject’.
to identifying favoured features when observing others Having a genuine knowledge and understanding of the
speak in public, there are four key issues that were subject is also critical for Lecturer C who posits that if
common to many of the lecturers. These four points are: students have prepared sufficiently they will no longer
be nervous since ‘they are living the project’. For him,
s TIMING it is in the Q&A section of an academic presentation
s STRUCTURE that students really display their knowledge and it
is at this point that discussion of the subject can be
s AUDIENCEAWARENESS
facilitated and expanded upon.
s RESEARCHBASIS
To summarise, four features that make a presentation
Having observed hundreds of student presentations suitable for academic contexts are that it:
over their careers, it is unsurprising that timing was
an issue that was mentioned by six lecturers (A, B, D, s CONTAINSREFERENCESANDISVERIFIABLE
E, F and H). Lecturer E claims that NES students in the s CONTAINSCITATIONSTOSOURCESWHICHARESYNTHESISED
UK are more conscious of timing and of how much
s CONTAINSSOLIDARGUMENTSBORNEOFRESEARCH
information can be put into a 12-minute presentation
than their NNES counterparts in China. This issue s DEMONSTRATES A STUDENTS TRUE KNOWLEDGE AND
was also raised by Lecturer A who mentioned that his encourages further discussion of the subject.
NNES students often either tried to ‘squeeze’ too much
or ‘expand’ too little information into their allotted
presentation time. Defining the scope of the
Six lecturers (A, B, E, F, G and H) also stressed that a
academic presentation
good presentation should be well-structured and have As outlined at the start of this paper there are many types
a logical organisation. Again, six of the eight lecturers of presentation tasks university students may be asked
(A, B, C, D, E and H) explicitly mentioned being aware to do, from formal assessments to informal seminar
of the audience and engaging them as being of major presentations. The thing that unites them, however, is
importance. The Q&A session at the end of presentations that they take place in the university sphere and it could
is cited by Lecturer B as a time for everyone to be argued that there are common expectations that cut
become involved; Lecturer C claimed this to be the across different academic disciplines. The discussions
most important part of the entire presentation. Having made clear the rigorous standards lecturers have when
content which is based on solid, verifiable research was it comes to presentations and that these are viewed in
also raised as a feature of a good presentation by six of a similar light to academic essays, a point support by
the lecturers (A, B, C, D, E and G). Zappa-Hollman (2007). Indeed, it seems to be the case
that while the medium may differ (oral and written)
What makes a presentation academic? the key features of academic discourse are similar,
with a clear parallel in the expectations of a good
Answers to this question bore the most similarities of all written assignment and a successful oral presentation.
of the questions posed and it became clear that the key As Lecturer F stated, an academic presentation is
words most associated with what makes a presentation ‘a verbal version of a written presentation’. Issues
academic are references, citations and verifiable. such as overall structure, logical progression and
Lecturer A stated that all images and information must firmly research-rooted conclusions based on reliable
be referenced and cited while Lecturer B went one step and verifiable evidence are as much a factor in oral
further by claiming it is necessary that sources can be presentations as essays. Oral presentations are also
verified. This was supported by Lecturer F, who asserted very much seen as a communicative act and the ability
that information in an academic presentation ‘has to to make complex arguments or issues accessible to a
be verifiable; otherwise it’s a chat’. Referencing sources wider public is highly valued. A particular challenge
was also raised by Lecturer H and she expressed her of an oral presentation however, is that students are
dismay that in her experience, many MA and even also expected to be able to articulate knowledge that
PhD students do not know how to cite orally. It is the

67
 folio 16/2 January 2015

is outside of the content of the presentation. Where Structuring academic presentations is approached
an academic essay represents the student’s complete in Emden and Becker (2010) albeit in a simple
answer, in an oral presentation the student’s ideas and introduction - low point - conclusion manner (Chapter
arguments are open to questioning and it was widely 5). Much greater detail and variety is dedicated to
felt by the lecturers that the question and answer structure and organisation in Chapter 7 of Chivers
stage of the presentation was the most valuable and and Schoolbred (2007). This publication also dedicates
insightful. Essentially, an academic oral presentation a whole chapter (6) to ‘understanding your audience’
contributes to, or promotes, further discussion (Zappa- while Emden and Becker (2010) do not. However, they
Hollman, 2007). This could lead us to the following do implicitly raise the issues of audience awareness
definition of the academic presentation: in various sections of the book. Similar to Stott et al.
(2001), Emden and Becker (2010) avoid dealing with
An oral academic presentation is a clear the research that has to be done in order to prepare
articulation of ideas, based on and referencing for an academic presentation, whereas Chivers and
sources or research evidence, in which the Schoolbred (2007) address this issue to some degree in
presenter leads the audience to logical and Chapter 7.
sound conclusions. Through the presentation
the presenter must analyse and evaluate Aside from the four features of good academic
information, making their reaction and position presentations, the characteristics of what makes a
clear to the audience. Information in an presentation specifically suitable for academia –
academic presentation must be verifiable and verifiability and the use of referencing and citations -
the presenter must have a wider and deeper were not examined in any of these three books targeted
knowledge of the topic than that presented in at NES students. However, there were numerous other
the body of the presentation. A presentation positive features about presenting in all of these books
should lead to discussion and further debate, which were influential in designing the criteria for
with the presenter able to respond to audience the survey evaluation of EAP presentations materials.
questions competently. All three books provided advice, to some degree, on
giving presentations in seminars; using one’s voice,
building confidence and dealing with nerves; using
A review of NES academic notes and visual aids. Both Emden and Becker (2010)
and Chivers and Schoolbred (2007) advise how to
presentation materials build a team for group work and touch on topics such
Having considered the expectations of lecturers across as forming a group, allocating roles and dealing with
disciplines it was felt important to review the scope and conflict. Only Chivers and Schoolbred (2007) address
coverage of materials designed to help native English rehearsing in the area the presentation is to be held in
speakers (NES) develop their academic presentation and being aware of learning styles comprehensively,
skills. The purpose of this review was to enhance the while a unique positive feature of Stott et al. (2001) is
criteria-referenced survey by establishing the needs of that they include a ‘sample criteria sheet for peer oral
NES student presenters and, by default, NNES students, assessment’ as an appendix.
The three titles reviewed were Speaking Your Mind:
Oral Presentations and Seminar Skills (Stott, Bryan
and Young, 2001), A Student’s Guide To Presentations Criteria-driven evaluation of
(Chivers and Schoolbred, 2007) and Presentation Skills NNES presentation materials
for Students: second edition (Emden and Becker, 2010).
At the time of writing there were three stand-alone
Of the four features of student presentations identified EAP presentation titles available for review. These
from the subject lecturer discussions - timing, structure, were University Foundation Study: Presentations -
audience awareness and research basis – none of Module 11 (Manning and Wilding, 1999), Passport to
these were dealt with in any great detail in the three Academic Presentations (Bell, 2008) and Giving Academic
publications reviewed above. The importance of time Presentations (Reinhart, 2002). The latter two titles have
management is addressed in Chivers and Schoolbred recently released second editions but unfortunately there
(2007) and Emden and Becker (2010) but not in Stott was no opportunity to review them for this paper.
et al. (2001). How to structure and logically organise
an academic presentation is barely undertaken in To evaluate the NNES presentation materials, a
Stott et al. (2001), apart from a brief section called criteria-driven approach, as outlined by Tomlinson,
‘Disposition of arrangement of material’ on page 102 Dat, Masuhara and Rubdy (2001), was preferred.
and signposting on page 119. Any notable advice on However, the very act of writing criteria limits the
carrying out research in advance of presentations scope of the evaluation so it was decided to divide
is absent in this book too. However, ‘knowing the the evaluation into two parts; an overall impression
audience’ is featured in Chapter 5. and an in-depth criteria-based evaluation. This is in
line with the proposed framework of McDonough and

68
 folio 16/2 January 2015

Shaw (2003) of an ‘external’ and ‘internal’ evaluation. Impressionistic, Criteria-Based and Overall
The overall impression represents 30% of the total Evaluation
score and the criteria-based evaluation 70%. This
division is representative of the greater validity that
more objective criteria-driven analysis carries over
impressionistic analysis.

The criteria were influenced by the discussions with

subject lecturers and review of NS targeted academic
presentation books. Due to the very specific nature
of the materials being evaluated, some of the typical
categories suggested for criterion-referenced surveys
could be excluded. There was no need to categorise the
criteria as being age-specific, for example, because they
are all targeted towards a similar student profile, which
is young adults in tertiary level education. Additionally,
local criteria would not be required since they were
being viewed globally or ‘context-free’ (Tomlinson,
2003, p. 23). The final list contained 40 criteria (see
Appendix 1) and in terms of survey questions, a mix
of analytical (focusing on the materials) and evaluative
(focusing on the users of the materials and their effects)
ones were used. Scales of 1 to 5 were employed; 1
meaning least likely or ‘not at all’ and 5 meaning most
likely or ‘fully’. This resulted in a possible minimum
Fig 3.0 – Breakdown of Evaluation Results
score of 40 and maximum score of 200.
With such a difference in the initial subjective marks,
it is worth viewing the results of the criteria-referenced
Evaluation results evaluation in more detail. The results for each set of
materials can be found in the following section.
These criteria were then given to three experienced
EAP professionals, two of whom work on materials
development (one male, one female) and one of whom
works in student academic advising (male). The three
Criteria category results
evaluators carried out the analysis separately and they Once the overall impression score is removed and only
were unaware of the identity of the other participants. the criteria-driven evaluation is taken into account,
The results of the three evaluators’ marks were collated there is a different pattern from the simple overview
and an average was calculated. The higher the mark, of the combined scores (see Fig 4.0). Instead, when
the greater ‘the potential value of the set of learning viewing the average of each section of the criteria-
materials’ (Tomlinson, 2003, p.15). based evaluation Reinhart (2002) emerges with the
highest average percentage in the three categories of
Combined Results ‘General Presentation Skills’, ‘Academic Presentations’
and ‘Language Support’ and could therefore arguably
From the results in Table 1.0 and Figure 3.0, it can be considered the most appropriate material.
be seen that the second title (Bell, 2008) performed
the best. The overall impression scores for this set of One result which was surprising was that the lowest
materials were noticeably higher than the others: 26% scoring of the four categories for both Bell (2008) and
higher than Manning and Wilding (1999) and 13% Reinhart (2002) was that of ‘Academic Presentations’.
higher than Reinhart (2002). It could be assumed that materials that bear ‘academic’
in the title should perform strongly in this category.
Table 1.0 The overall results of the evaluation of For Manning and Wilding (1999) the category which
NNES-targeted EAP presentation materials performed most poorly was ‘Language Support’ while
NNES-targeted Materials Overall Result ‘Academic Presentations’ gained the second lowest
percentage points for these materials.
University Foundation Study:
Presentations - Module 11 48%

Passport to Academic Presentations 61%

Giving Academic Presentations 58%

69
 folio 16/2 January 2015

Overview of Average Evaluation Results identified three reasons why presentations are carried
out in academic contexts. They can be summarised
as being (a) transferable communication skills (b)
research-based and allowing students to learn
independently and (c) important in revealing how well
students know the subject matter. Four features that
content lecturers acknowledge as key to delivering
presentations effectively were also established. These
lecturers want their students to deliver well-timed
and well-structured presentations which are based on
research and take the audience into account.

In addition, the characteristics of what makes a

presentation particularly relevant to academic
contexts were also determined. According to the
majority of the subject matter lecturers, academic
oral presentations should (i) contain references and
be verifiable; (ii) contain synthesised sources; (iii)
contain solid arguments borne of research and (iv)
demonstrate that the student truly knows his or her
subject and encourages further discussion on the topic.
However, more work needs to be done, particularly in
examining the conventions of different presentation
genres to see how closely they match their written
Fig 4.0 Overview of Average Evaluation Results by counterparts, but for the moment we can say with
Category certainty that oral presentations are an important form
of academic discourse and that students need more
A substantial point that this highlights is that both NES than technical presentation skills to deliver effective
and NNES-targeted academic presentation materials academic presentations.
contain very little guidance on what was determined
as relevant for oral presentations by subject lecturers. With is being the case, the criteria-driven evaluation
The results from the materials evaluation of the of existing NNES academic presentation materials
three NNES materials also showed that the features suggests current training materials focus on developing
concluded as being ‘academic’ in oral presentations general presentation skills but could do more to
by content lecturers were barely touched upon. Survey develop the specific skills needed to delivery successful
questions about avoiding plagiarism, citing sources, academic presentations. In particular, more focus on
using references and basing presentations on verifiable the structure and organisation of different genres of
research elicited mainly the minimum score of one or academic presentation and guidance on integrating
two from the three evaluators. sources and referencing would be welcome.

Conclusion References
In 1996, Ferris and Tagg clearly identified the need to Alexander, O., Argent, S. and Spencer, J. (2008). EAP
Essentials: A Teacher’s Guide to Principles and Practice.
gather information about ‘real-world academic tasks’
Reading: Garnet Education.
(which includes oral presentations) in order to be able
to ‘equip EAP students for the variety of challenges Bell, D. (2008). Passport to Academic Presentations. Reading:
awaiting them’ (1996, p.53). Since then, there has still Garnet Education.
been relatively little research on the oral academic Chivers, B. and Schoolbred, M. (2007). A Student’s Guide to
presentation. This paper strives to add to what is Presentations. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
accessible and to encourage further discussion on the
Emden, J. and Becker, L. (2010). Presentation Skills for
topic since it is an important skill in EAP learning Students: (2nd edn). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
and deserves to be recognised as such. The fact that
presentation skills can be transferred from academia to Ferris, D. and Tagg, T. (1996). Academic Oral Communication
learners’ professional lives, or ‘from gown to town’ as Needs of EAP Learners: What Subject-matter Instructors
Hill and Storey (2003, p.373) put it, is reason enough Actually Require. TESOL Quarterly 30, 1, 31-58 [Online].
Available online: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
to teach them.
doi/10.2307/3587606 [01/08/2012].
This project aimed to add to our understanding of Flowerdew, J. and Peacock, M. (2001). ‘The Development of
the particular features of academic presentations. We EAP Oral Discussion Ability’. In J. Flowerdew and M. Peacock

70
 folio 16/2 January 2015

(eds.). Research Perspectives on English for Academic

Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Appendix 1: Evaluation Criteria
Hill, M. and Storey, A (2003). SpeakEasy: Online Support Course Design
for Oral Presentation Skills. ELT Journal, 54, 7, 370-376.
Available online: http://203.72.145.166/ELT/files/57-4-6. 1. Do the materials provide clearly stated aims?
pdf [21/11/2012].
2. Are the learners likely to be engaged by the topics
Manning, A. and Wilding, E. (1999). Presentations: University
Foundation Study Course Book: Module 11. Reading: Garnet in the materials?
Education.
3. Do the materials include instructions which are
McDonough, J. and Shaw, C. (2003). Materials and Methods clear?
in ELT (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
4. Do the materials include good quality pictures/
Miles, R. (n.d.). ‘Oral Presentations for English Proficiency
graphics?
Purposes’. Reflections on English Language Teaching, Vol. 8,
No. 2, pp. 103–110 [Online]. Available online: http://www. 5. Do the materials contain multi-media components?
nus.edu.sg/celc/research/relt/files/Vol8_2/103-110miles.pdf
[21/6/2012]. 6. Are there opportunities for the learners to reflect on
Reinhart, S. (2002). Giving Academic Presentations. Michigan: their learning?
University of Michigan Press.
7. Will the self-study opportunities in the material
Seliman, S and Naitim, M. (2010 Unpublished). The Genre motivate the learners to study independently?
of the Body of Oral Presentations Delivered by English for
Workplace Communication Students, pp. 1-9. Available 8. Do the materials provide a peer evaluation sheet for
online: http://eprints.utm.my/10452/ [9/9/2012]. presentations?
Soureshjani, K and Ghanbari, H. (2012). Factors Leading
9. Do the materials provide a self-evaluation sheet for
to an Effective Oral Presentation in EFL Classrooms. The
TFLTA Journal (online), Vol 3, Pg 37-50. Available online: presentations?
http://www.tflta.org/uploads/1/0/6/9/10696220/tfltajour-
10. Do the materials include an index of key terms?
nal3.pdf#page=37 [9/9/2012]
Stott, R., Bryan, C. and Young, T. (2001). Speaking Your General Presentation Skills
Mind: Oral Presentations and Seminar Skills. Harlow:
Pearson Education Ltd. 11. Do the materials introduce the characteristics of an
Tomlinson, B. (2003). ‘Materials Evaluation’. In B. Tomlinson, effective presentation?
ed. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London:
Continuum, pp.15-36.
12. Are learners likely to be able to produce a well-
structured presentation?
Tomlinson, B., Dat, B., Masuhara, H. and Rubdy, R.
(2001). ‘EFL Courses for Adults’. ELT Journal, 55, 1, 13. Are learners likely to take into account the intended
80-101. Available online: http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/ audience when preparing presentations?
content/55/1/80.full.pdf+html?ath_user=not-zalzab&ath_
ttok=%3CUHjl7KPuv7i2IIcqkg%3E [14/07/2012] 14. Are learners likely to give engaging presentations
Zappa-Hollman, S. (2007). ‘Academic presentations across
to appeal to the different learning styles of the
post-secondary contexts: the discourse socialization of non- audience members?
native English Speaker’. The Canadian Modern Language
15. Are learners likely to be able to produce effective
Review, 63, 4, 455-485.
notes to help them deliver their presentations?

16. To what extent are learners encouraged to develop

Peter Levrai has been working in EFL since 1995 techniques to avoid reading from a script in
and is currently working in the University of Macau. presentations?
He has worked in general, corporate and academic
contexts. His particular area of interest is developing 17. To what extent is the importance of timing stressed
specialized courses for highly specific needs. when planning a presentation?
Email: [email protected] 18. Do the materials provide advice for overcoming
nervousness?
Averil Bolster has been teaching English since the
mid nineteen-nineties and is currently working in the 19. Are the learners likely to develop more confidence
University of Macau. She has worked on a wide variety in giving presentations?
of EFL/ESL programs, including exam preparation,
EAP and technical and engineering English. 20. Do the materials provide guidance about dealing
with audience questions at the end of a presentation?
E-mail: [email protected]

71
 folio 16/2 January 2015

21. Do the materials provide tips on the use of 31. Do the materials inform the reader how to carry out
technology in presentations, e.g. PowerPoint? research before a presentation?

22. To what extent will learners be able to present 32. Do the materials encourage students to base their
tables, graphs or charts effectively? presentations on verifiable research?

23. To what extent will learners be able to present 33. Are the learners likely to be able to avoid plagiarism
diagrams, sketches or models effectively? when planning their presentations?

24. Do the materials raise learners’ awareness of the 34. How likely will the learners be able to cite their
environment of the presentation room? sources effectively both orally and in visual aids?

25. Are the learners likely to maximise their use of 35. Do the materials guide the students in the use
body language in presentations? of providing references at the end of their
presentations?
Academic Presentations
Language Support
26. To what extent will learners be able to give
presentations of different genres, e.g. problem- 36. To what extent will students be able to use
solution/research-based/presenting a journal signposting language to aid in structuring their
article/poster presentation? presentations?

27. To what extent do the materials prepare students 37. Do the materials include glossaries of key vocabulary
for individual presentations? related to presentations?

28. Do the materials provide features of what makes a 38. Do the materials provide guidance on maximising
good informal presentation in seminars? the use of one’s voice in engaging an audience?

29. Do the materials give advice for developing group 39. Do the materials encourage students to improve the
presentations? clarity of their speech?

30. Do the materials provide advice on team 40. To what extend do the materials encourage students
management for group presentations? to use an appropriate academic register in their
presentations?

FOR MATSDA MEMBERSHIP PLEASE CONTACT

Susi Pearson, MATSDA Membership Secretary, Norwich Institute for Language Education,
82 Upper St Giles Street, Norwich NR2 1LT, UK, e-mail: [email protected]

www.matsda.org/folio.html

72