Ex. 3. What are the advantages of conference discussions?[50] Think about the following. Is there anything missing from the list? Discuss it with your partner.

Ideally, academic conferences are vehicles for disseminating your research, facilitating intellectual exchange, and forging valuable professional and social networks with peers and established scholars. The relationship between writing thesis chapters and giving conference papers should be a symbiotic one.

Formal sessions usually consist of two or three paper presenters, a chair, and a commentator, who is expected to draw a few links between the papers and offer brief but constructive feedback to each presenter. Usually, paper presenters are asked to submit their written papers to their designated commentator a month or so in advance. At the conference, they are given anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes to present a summary of their paper. Conferences also sponsor panels or roundtables where participants speak briefly to the issue at hand rather than deliver a formal paper. Whatever the format, make sure you follow instructions and stick to time limits.

If you are to read a conference paper, allow ample time to write the best one you can and practise ahead of time. Normally, you will be told exactly how long your presentation should be, so plan accordingly. You can count on reading a page of approximately 250 words in about two minutes, so keep your paper short enough to stay within the time assigned. The person who chairs the session has the duty to cut off presentations after the allotted time has expired. You do not want to be asked to sit down just before you have reached that eloquent climax. Nor do you want to rush madly through a paper that you know is too long: you will lose your audience.

There may be a difference between your written paper and oral presentation. The former should be written in formal, scholarly style with footnotes and full citations and tends to be approximately 25-35 pages, the length of most journal articles. If your panel includes a chair and commentator, submit a copy of your written paper to them in advance. Commentators do vary in style, flexibility, and degree of preparation. Some want the time to compose a polished critique, others are more casual or flexible about deadlines, though that does not mean that the commentary will be casually prepared or presented. You want constructive feedback and intellectual exchange, so do your best to get it. On the other hand, do not get upset if your commentator turns out to be overly harsh. Most commentators offer well-balanced critiques of papers, and those who are overly harsh or unfair actually hurt their own reputations. If that happens, do not get upset or act defensive, but by all means respond forcefully in defense of your research. The same applies to fielding questions from the audience. Accept criticism of your work while also emphasizing your positive contributions.

The oral presentation should be written with a listening audience in mind. Remember: you have little time in which to convince your audience that you are doing interesting and important work, so hit the highlights. Take the time to craft a polished paper that effectively summarizes some main arguments and offers interesting illustrations. Use simpler prose than you would do for a written paper you intend to publish; your argument will be easier to follow if your sentences are relatively short and use few subordinate clauses. Avoid the temptation to say too much: do not include too many details, statistics, or disclaimers. This is especially important if you use PowerPoint because it takes more time. Do not let the technology dominate your talk. Too many pictures and too much slide text can be distracting, as can a malfunctioning computer or projector. Be sure to show up early to your session in case any technical problems need to be cleared up. It is perfectly acceptable to assert that the paper covers issues in more detail, or to whet the audience's appetite by focusing on the paper's most dramatic parts or provocative arguments. Of course, you will feel that you have reduced your work to less than a bare bones summary. All of us grow attached to our research (not to mention our phrases and narrative devices! ), but you must be brief, clear, and succinct.

Although few people say it, the conference presentation (like the lecture) is also a performance. The quality of your work is the most important thing, but the audience will also evaluate your delivery. Those who are impressed with your performance will want to meet you and possibly invite you to give a talk in their department. Do not underestimate word of mouth. People remember bad performances, whether delivered by a senior historian or a novice. But do not make yourself sick over your first presentation; take precautions to help you get through the hurdles. And remember what one history professor was told following his first conference performance: it is over, you will never again have to deliver your first conference paper, and you will be amazed by how much easier the second and third performances will be.

You should practise your conference presentation in advance – and, if possible, before a fairly large audience. This is especially critical for graduate students. Let colleagues help you improve the presentation; listen to their advice and be prepared to revise. Try to remember that the best criticism often comes from colleagues whose fields and perspectives differ from your own. Also, rehearsals will make the actual performance far less stressful. Practise your presentation, but do not overpractise.  

When giving your paper, remember to perform! Learn to project so that your voice could speak in an animated and engaging manner. Look up from your paper, and make eye contact with your audience. Plan to wear an outfit that makes you look and feel both professional and confident. There is no “right” ensemble – some scholars wear suits (conservative or funky) to conference presentations, while others prefer more casual attire.

People present conference papers for various reasons, including building up their CVs, and accumulating credentials. But surely the most important goal is to share your ideas and receive responses to them from an audience of well-informed scholars. Go into your session prepared for this intellectual give-and-take. But also be prepared for no give-and-take. You may find that your session is not well-attended or that you get few (or even no) questions or comments. Do not take it personally. Even if you have a limited audience, deliver your presentation with gusto. Engage with your fellow panellists during the discussion period. You will still get the practise, and the experience will still end up on your CV. Moreover, smaller sessions can actually offer more of the intellectual exchange we desire and facilitate networking.

For a scholar, there is nothing quite so gratifying as to have your work spark animated discussion and exchange. When it happens, enjoy it!