“NEW PowerPoint® DIET!: Top 10 Steps to a More Svelte PowerPoint®”

CHRONIC TEXTYITUS
The answer to the multiple-choice item from the previous blog is “E.” It can be any of those reasons and many others. The problem is there is too much text. If you are afflicted with this infirmity of chronic “Textyitus,” proceed to my diet; otherwise, you can bail.

POWERPOINT® DIET
Guess what? Yup, it’s D I E T time! Those are 4 of the most hated letters in our vocabulary. You can do this. It requires only 10 simple steps. Once you implement this diet, you won’t even recognize your PowerPoint®. It will be a “PowerPoint® Makeover." You'll be cured forever of Textyitus.

In order to lop off excess text from each slide so that your audience will learn, remember, and be engaged in the content you present, follow this step by step:

1. Start with your text-bloated slides with all of the content, exercises, fill-ins, and note spaces (If you don’t have any, get some)

2. Consider these slides DECK #1, which will be a draft of the handout you will distribute to your audience; they need the details to read, study, review, take notes, and process after your presentation

3. Use this Handout Deck to create DECK #2, which is your much abbreviated, slimmed down Presentation Deck

4. Take each slide and ask yourself: “Self, isn’t this bloated blog with a stupid diet metaphor over yet?” WROOONG! “What’s the point of this slide?”

5. When you figure out the main point from all of the text, type a couple of short sentences or a FEW bullet points on your clean slide to emphasize what you want your audience to learn and remember (NOTE: 1 main point per slide, plus any relevant engagement activity, if appropriate)

6. Edit the content on the “New & Improved” slide and, even better, consider adding a visual image (still, animated, or video) to punctuate your point or replace part or all of the text


OOPS! I’ve exceeded my word limit. My next blog will finish the remaining 4 steps. You don’t want to miss the desserts on this diet.

For several articles on the research and more detailed practices for PowerPoint® presentations, go to http://www.pptdoctor.net.

I hope you find these suggestions useful in your work. Let me know your thoughts.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“NEW PowerPoint® DIET!: A Must Try for ALL PowerPointers”

What kind of diet could this possibly be? We all know from Dr. Oz and the PBS fundraising-drive, brain-and-body guys (NOTE: So far no women docs. Why?) that diets don’t work. But we do know that all diets involve cutting back or out certain foods (aka “everything that tastes good”) and substituting other foods (aka “food that tastes bad or has no taste,” like a tofu sandwich on a Styrofoam rice cake, which is barf on a stick).

POWERPOINT PROBLEM
So how does this semi-humorous diet chit-chat relate to PowerPoint®? Great question! It has to do with the major complaint about PowerPoints®:

A June 2011 survey of the U.S. adult population (3.2% margin of error) by IBOPE Zogby International (Allen, 2011) concluded that “death by PowerPoint^®” is a national epidemic and called for a presentation revolution. Too much text and boring graphics top the list of frustrating and uninspired features. Can you relate to those findings? PowerPoint^® ranks as one of the most dreaded presentation platforms, with respondents claiming they would rather forego sex tonight (24%), do their taxes (21%), go to the dentist (20%), or work on Saturday (18%) than have a close encounter of the PowerPoint^® kind. (QUESTION: Does that mean the other 76–82% had sex, refused to do their taxes, let their teeth rot, and went sailing on Saturday?)

TOO MUCH TEXT

Why is there too much text on PPT slides?

A. The presenter slaps the whole presentation on the slides and uses the text as a crutch

B. The presenter doesn’t know the material well enough to slap only a little text on the slides

C. The presenter doesn’t prepare a separate handout with the detailed text

D. The presenter hasn’t read my latest article, which reviews the research on cognitive overload; the audience cannot possibly understand and remember a bucket of text on each slide 

E. ALL OF THE ABOVE

For the answer to the above test item and details on the PowerPoint® Diet, tune in to my next blog.

For several articles on the research and more detailed practices for PowerPoint® presentations, go to http://www.pptdoctor.net.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC 

“SECRET FORMULA for ‘THRILLER’ PowerPoints®”

Over the past 6 months, I completed a blog series, 3 articles, and 6 YouTube videos on PowerPoint^®. It is a challenging medium for presentations, but it is the industry standard in teaching, speaking, and business. I don’t know of anyone who is satisfied with his/her PowerPoint^®. It can always be improved.

VIDEO SERIES on PowerPoint^®

In the recent video series, I have attempted to create examples of PowerPoint^® formats, particularly with multimedia, that anyone can do with their version of PowerPoint^® for free. You don’t need a degree in graphic or instructional design or technology to produce effective PowerPoints^®. The latest video is the most basic, demonstrating how you can transform a simple dead word on a slide and add color, animation, music, still image, and video to improve the learning from a slide. While there are tons of tutorials, this is my 3-min. attempt: VIDEO

Let me know whether this is helpful.

HAPPY POWERPOINT!

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“DO VIDEOS IN POWERPOINT® INCREASE LEARNING? Conclusions!”

VIDEOS (continued)

Research evidence. The results of Mayer’s research indicate that the contiguous presentation of verbal and visual material as in videos with integrated dialogue or narration is most effective for novices and visual learners (e.g., Ventura & Onsman, 2009). That is, the use of meaningful video clips in PowerPoint® may be most appropriate for introductory as well as complex topics and for lower achieving and/or visual/spatial learners.

The empirical findings of research over the past half century on the effectiveness of videos embedded in multimedia classes or modules are noteworthy. Overall, most of the investigations support the “dual-coding theory” that more is better: multimedia auditory/verbal and visual/pictorial stimuli increase memory, comprehension, understanding, and deeper learning than any single stimulus by itself (Kirschner, Kester, & Corbalan, 2011). Learning in the pictorial conditions tested (video and audiovisual) was superior to learning in the verbal (audio) conditions. This is consistent with the picture superiority effect (Nelson, Reed, & Walling, 1976; Paivio, Rogers, & Smythe, 1968).

CONCLUSIONS: There is a solid foundation of cognitive psychology, learning theory, and physiological research and experience with “rich media” (Ayres, Marcus, Chan, & Qian, 2009; Höffler & Leutner, 2007; Kirschner et al., 2011; Lane & Wright, 2011; Mayer, 2009; Metiri Group, 2008). Including still and animated visuals, especially graphics, and media systematically in your slides with intended learning outcomes will positively affect just about every aspect of your teaching or presentation. Distinctions should be drawn among media that are designed to grab and maintain attention, to improve learning, and/or to increase retention or memory of information.

Despite the multimedia research base, there is still an urgent need to test the range of animation and media applications in the specific context of PowerPoint® presentations to determine their effects and limitations under controlled experimental conditions in the classroom at all levels (e.g., Bartsch & Cobern, 2003; Levasseur & Sawyer, 2006). There are a variety of options and uses of multimedia in PowerPoint® for which evidence does not exist.

Hopefully, the review of research in these blogs will provide you with a justification and some traction in gliding your progress toward media-embedded or streamed presentations with your audience as well as gathering data on their effectiveness. Please let me know your thoughts on the research reviewed in these blogs, particularly if there are glaring omissions. I hope you found some value in the work.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“DO STILL IMAGES AND VIDEOS IN POWERPOINT® INCREASE LEARNING?”

STILL IMAGES
Much has been written in the basic PowerPoint® references about the power of visuals in PowerPoint®. Pictures, graphs, charts, diagrams, and a variety of graphic designs can stimulate emotional reactions and increase attention and retention of content more than words alone (Markel, 2009; Mayer, 2009, in press; Lane & Wright, 2011). The stronger the images, the more powerful the slides, the more effective your presentation will be.

VIDEOS
Beyond these visuals and infographics are the uses of video clips embedded in PowerPoint® slides (Berk, 2009a) and streaming videos in the presentation (Eddy & Bracken, 2008; Miller, 2009). Since there are few guidelines for videos in the most popular PowerPoint® sources on the topic, this section addresses the value and impact of videos.

Cognitive and learning theories. Several theories of learning have examined the dual coding of verbal communication, including visual, auditory, or articulatory codes, and nonverbal communication, which may include shapes, sounds, kinesthetic actions, and emotions. The theories have been linked to multimedia and the research has tested a variety of applications.

Multimedia typically refers to the presentation of material in two forms: auditory/verbal and visual/pictorial (Mayer, 2009, in press). Strategies have included PowerPoint® (Gellevij, Ven Der Meij, De Jong, & Pieters, 2002; Mayer & Johnson, 2008) and games (Moreno & Mayer, 2004, 2005) in a variety of content areas.

Mayer’s (2009) cognitive theory of learning is activated through five steps: “(a) selecting relevant words for processing in verbal working memory, (b) selecting relevant images for processing in visual working memory, (c) organizing selected words into a verbal mental model, (d) organizing selected images into a visual mental model, and (e) integrating verbal and visual representations as well as prior knowledge” (p. 54). His theory represents an amalgam of Sweller’s (1999) cognitive load theory (Chandler & Sweller, 1991; Kirschner, Kester, & Corbalan, 2011), Baddeley’s (1999) working memory model, and Paivio’s (1986) dual-coding theory (Clark & Paivio, 1991).

WHAT’S NEXT? What does Mayer’s research indicate about the impact of videos on learning? The final conclusions will be presented.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“DOES MUSIC IN POWERPOINT® INCREASE LEARNING OR ANYTHING ELSE?”

MUSIC
When you're listening to music or watching a TV program (Glee), movie, YouTube clip, or a commercial, your feelings and emotions, such as excitement, anger, laughter, relaxation, sadness, love, whimsy, or even boredom, are often triggered or heightened by the music playing behind the action. These emotions occur reflexively. You are responding to the mood created by the music and the scene. The music can have a strong effect on how you react (Levitin, 2006, 2008). A single song or the entire soundtrack is so powerful that you may download it off the Internet so you can listen again and again to relive the experience. Is there any evidence to support these effects? You bet!

Research Evidence: PSYCHOLOGICAL. The research indicates that music elicits emotional reactions of liking or disliking and excitement or arousal (North & Hargreaves, 1997; Robazza, Macaluso, & D’Urso, 1994; Sloboda & Justin, 2001). It can set the tone or mood instantaneously (Sousou, 1997; Stratton & Zalanowski, 1994). Music is also the emotional source of “chills” or “your hair standing on end” (Panksepp, 1995; Salimpoor, Benovoy, Larcher, Dagher, & Zatorre, 2011).

Research Evidence: HEMISPHERIC. The best news is that music taps both hemispheres of your brain: the left side processes rhythm and lyrics AND the right side listens for melodies, sounds, and harmonic relationships (Bever & Chiarello, 1974; Hébert & Peretz, 1997; Schlaug, Jancke, Haung, Staiger, & Steinmetz, 1995), and the connections between the two hemispheres increase as you age (Schlaug et al., 1995). In fact, music listening engages nearly every area of the brain and involves almost every neural subsystem (Levitin, 2006).

WHAT’S NEXT? I’ll finish this topic with the physiological evidence and my conclusions on using music in PowerPoint.


COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“DOES MOVEMENT (Transitions & Animation) IN POWERPOINT® INCREASE LEARNING?”

ST. PATRICK'S DAY BLOG!
My next few blogs will focus on the research on three neglected elements in PowerPoint®: (1) movement, (2) music, and (3) videos. The simple question is: Do they improve learning or anything else? Do they have the potential to raise the PowerPoint® bar to a new level of “best practices” in the classroom? Let’s begin with

MOVEMENT (Dedicated to Fans of PREZI)
When something moves, your eyeballs move to track it. That’s perfectly natural. However, when the movement slows up or stops in your classroom, students may get bored and click to something else. PowerPoint® permits transitions of slides and animation of words, letters, and graphics. When that movement is systematically choreographed throughout a presentation, it can grab and maintain attention. Used inappropriately, it can annoy and distract your students from the content being covered.

Research Evidence: TEXT. Is there research on the use of transitions and animation in the classroom? Not on transitions, but a smidgen on text animation. The technique of introducing bits and pieces of text information incrementally on slides with animation has been tested by only a couple of studies (Janicki, Yaylacicegi, & Mahar, 2009; Mahar, Yaylacicegi, & Janicki, 2009). Despite students’ preference for animation in PowerPoint® lectures, the results indicated that students shown static lecture slides learned more about new concepts than those who viewed the animated slides. The animation required greater concentration with a shorter exposure time. Certainly, that time could be extended.

Research Evidence: GRAPHICS. Contrary to the preceding results is the research that found that animated graphics are significantly more effective than static graphics (Höffler & Leutner, 2007; Lowe, 2001, 2003; Mayer & Moreno, 2002; McLean, Brown, & Bellamy, 2003; Tversky, Morrison, & Betrancourt, 2002; Yu & Smith, 2008). Properly designed animations to illustrate concepts and procedures can generate interest, motivation, and engagement, which can promote deep learning (Mayer & Anderson, 1991; Ruffini, 2009). There are no studies testing different types of animation. Presenting techniques or processes, in particular, may benefit more from animation.

CONCLUSION: Consider using animation when it fits the content, especially to explain processes in graphic form. Transitions and animation of text should be used judiciously, since there is inadequate evidence to the contrary.

WHAT’S NEXT? Have you used music in your slides to create an emotional connection or humor? There’s lots of research on this topic. Just wait…

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

“RESEARCH ON MULTIMEDIA IN POWERPOINT®: Why Bother?”

MULTIMEDIA IS DISCOURAGED BY EXPERTS
Beyond the basics of PowerPoint®, how can multimedia be utilized effectively with PowerPoint® in the classroom? Other than posting “dead words” on a screen, do movement, music, and videos in PowerPoint® facilitate learning or impede it? To date, those elements have been virtually disregarded, dismissed, dissed, and even discouraged by PowerPoint® gurus (in business and industry) when the technology to embed or stream those media is readily available? For example, Duarte (2008) and Reynolds (2008) give them miniscule attention, yet acknowledge the powerful active cognitive processing effects they can have. They usually caution users to integrate them either sparingly or not at all or to “not overdo it.” But most teachers and presenters under do it or don’t do it at all. To engage Net Generation students, in particular, who are bored with traditional PowerPoints®, faculty may need “to do” and, maybe, “over do.”

WHERE’S THE LOVE AND SUPPORT?
With FREE software readily accessible, such as Audacity (music) and Movie Maker (videos), why do so few faculty and presenters incorporate media into their presentations? Even a study of presentations by CEOs of technology companies indicated that multimedia was incorporated typically in the form of photographs and graphics, but no music and very few animations, videos, and online links were used (Kammeyer, 2007).

Granted, in-house IT staff may not have the time or want to be bothered to assist faculty to do the animations or actual media extractions and conversions. They may have other more pressing demands. By default, then, teachers are forced either to learn it themselves or to outsource it to techies who know how to do it; otherwise, it won’t get done. With time becoming a scarcer commodity and job tasks and responsibilities increasing, multimedia in PowerPoint® may be a luxury many professionals cannot afford.

WHY RESEARCH ON MULTIMEDIA?
Do any of those PowerPoint® add-ons, such as movement, music, visuals, and videos, contribute to the effectiveness of instruction? Do they increase attention, engagement, or understanding of the content? Should faculty move literally and figuratively beyond dead words on the screen? They may already have slides with bright, high-contrast, saturated colors, flashy templates, and loads of graphics. That’s great, but what are the words doing? If they’re still cadaver-like, teachers will immediately shift their Net Geners from boring to snoring. Say it with me: “DEAD WORDS ARE BORING!” Got it? Did you actually say those words?

WHAT’S NEXT? The next few blogs will review the research on movement, music, visuals, and videos in PowerPoint®.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

"TOP 10 RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS ABOUT BASIC POWERPOINT®"

Guess what? PowerPoint-wise, do we know for sure what works, when, with whom, how, or why? Do we really have enough research evidence to design simple PowerPoint® slides so that our audience will actually learn and retain the content we present?


There is only a fist-full of studies on the basic features and instructional uses of PowerPoint® over the past decade. One unpublished review by Kammeyer (2007) analyzed some of the findings. Here’s the list.

TOP 10 CONCLUSIONS:

1. Most students prefer PowerPoint® to traditional lecture (Amare, 2006; Hastings & Attila, 2000; Savoy, Proctor, & Salvendy, 2009), despite how boring it might be (Mann & Robinson, 2009)

2. Traditional PowerPoint® doesn’t produce significant differences in learning (review by Levasseur & Sawyer, 2006) compared to several alternatives

3. Reading text verbatim on a slide off of the screen decreases learning and retention (“redundancy principle”) (Mayer & Johnson, 2008)

4. Gill Sans, Souvenir, and similar fonts are more comfortable to read, interesting, attractive, and professional compared to other fonts (Mackiewicz, 2007a)

5. High-contrast colors and easy-to-read text, graphs, and graphics increase learning (Bradshaw, 2003)

6. High-contrast slides are not more effective than medium-contrast slides in learning and satisfaction (Earnest, 2003)

7. Full-sentence headline (written as an assertion) compared to a word or phrase increases retention of slide content, especially with a clear supportive graphic (Alley & Neeley, 2005; Alley, Schreiber, Ramsdell, & Muffo, 2006)

8. Irrelevant pictures accompanying text and sound effects decrease learning (Bartsch & Cobern, 2003)

9. 2D graphs are preferable to 3D graphs for clarity and comprehension (Mackiewicz, 2007b; Stewart, Cipolla, & Best, 2009)

10. Cool color (blue, green, etc.) high-contrast graphs are preferred over warm colors (Mackiewicz, 2007b)

POSTMORTUM RELECTION: Obviously, these results from slightly more than a dozen studies don’t tell us a lot about how to prepare our slides. Most used very traditional text-on-the-screen formats with some graphics, resembling electronic overheads. Although the sheer scarcity of studies is inadequate to guide current PowerPoint® practices in teaching and other presentations, they do suggest certain preferences you might consider in your slide designs.

That's it. Whatta ya think? Any comments? Let me know your thoughts.

WHAT’S NEXT? Beyond the basics, presenters should consider a multimedia approach to their PowerPoints®. The research on the multimedia options will be examined in the next few blogs.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC

RESEARCH ON POWERPOINT®: WHAT DO WE KNOW?

I’m beginning a new series on PowerPoint® to examine what the research indicates about its effectiveness as a presentation tool. My intent is to reveal how we can use the evidence to guide and, maybe, just maybe, to create “best practices.” This 1st blog provides a disclaimer on what I will cover and not cover in the series. I hope you find it of value.

DISCLAIMER: At present, there are approximately 300 million PowerPoint® users (30 million presentations per day) worldwide (Lowenthal, 2009), give or take 5 professors on sabbatical. That number is just slightly more than the cast of Glee. There are barrels of books, articles, blogs, and outsourcing businesses that describe the “appropriate uses” of PowerPoint® and extol its virtues. You have probably followed their ubiquitous guidelines for preparing the content on your slides, such as titles, lists, text, and graphics (see Abela, 2008; Altman, 2007; Atkinson, 2008; Cooper, 2009; Duarte, 2008; Paradi, 2000, 2010; Reynolds, 2008; Tufte, 2003b).
      However, there is also a small bucket of articles recommending that every software version of PowerPoint® be blown up with military-grade explosives (see Elwood, 2005; Kapterev, 2008; Tufte, 2003a). Since I have no experience with explosives and minimal practice even with squirt guns, I have chosen not to engage in PowerPoint® polemics (e.g., Amernic, 2006; Doumont, 2005) or evaluate the merits of alternatives, such as Keynote (for Macs), Prezi, and Pecha-Kucha.
      Instead, this blog series will focus on three elements of PowerPoint® which are neglected by most sources on the topic, but have a strong research foundation and the potential to change the impact significantly of any presentation to any audience. Those three elements will be kept secret and guarded by TSA agents on Starbucks® break at O’Hare International High-Security Really-Safe Airport until it is time to reveal their contents, the elements, that is, not the agents.

WHAT’S NEXT: I’m going to present the “Top 10 Research Conclusions about Basic PowerPoint®.” Stick around. It will get interesting.

COPYRIGHT © 2011 Ronald A. Berk, LLC