Another academic conference, another presentation, another item for the CV, add points on the publish-or-perish scale – aaaaargh!
Sure you know this: A session, 60 minutes, three presentations?
Presenters are given 15 minutes to put their stall out, afterwards 5 minutes of discussion … what sort of exchange is possible in such a framework?
As someone with a bit of interest in a given topic, neither will the presentation suffice, nor will the “discussion”, or whatever you wish to call it. Should it happen that you are actually touched by a topic, or an aspect of the presentation, should you in fact start thinking about it in any meaningful manner … you are at the wrong place, sorry, this set-up is not suitable for such odd things.
Before you are at the point where you might have ordered your thoughts silently in your head, or (beware) had a chance to even do so in exchange with the rest of the people in the room … the time warden has already raised the red flag. Next presentation, next power-point, next doughnut, next, next, who’s next – remember the chipper in town at 2 a.m., do you?
What we want is something different. As a contributor you will make a real contribution, one that is meant to incite thought, discussion, exchange, and you will connect with the participants in the room who came to hear what you have to say, and to engage with you in a discussion that arises from your contribution.
Sure, you may call your contribution a presentation. But in the case of the symposium on CMW if you are a presenter you are first of all a contributor, laying out a path for others to engage with you in a meaningful manner.